• ■ • • A*^ . . . . V^^'V . . . V*"^' •' <**■ 



* o 



^^d* 









%.^" -^^ 









' ♦ ^ "^ »^ 






.0^ o 

0^ ^'V.** ^ 















^ 4^^ *^B^' "^ V" *!(< 



"■"'.\ c°\-;^-*°- ./.-^^-X /.'-^^.^^o 





%/ ••- 










s>' ■ V °"^^*" . **"^** . '-.^1?/ /'x '-y^-' . ^^ *-^ -^ 









"^0 






;^t^-/ X/^f^^^"- %^^'/ \-^?^*/ 



*^^=,'5* * 



*,,*" .♦, 



V*^ 







v./ . 



*on 






^ 






•2-5" '^-*l 



StCJ 




ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP 



CONCERNING THE 

9 



BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF 

FRANCIS BACON 



DISCOVERED IN HIS WORKS BY 



ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP 



PROS AND CONS OF THE 
CONTROVERSY 



Explanations, Reviews 
Criticisms and Replies 



DETROIT, MICH., U. S. A.: 
HOWARD PUBLISHING CO. 

LONDON : 
GAY & BIRD. 



i= I ^i I 




.^ 



^ 



G' 



oA 



J 






THE BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF FRANCIS BACON, 
Deciphered by Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 

THIRD EDITION 

This edition embraces decipherings from the commence- 
ment of the use of Bacon's Cipher inventions — now found to be 
1579 — and covering the entire period of his literary career, 
including some works published by Kawley subsequent to 1626. 
The Cypher has been traced with certainty down to 1651. 

This Bi-literal Cypher reveals much secret history concern- 
ing Queen Elizabeth, who, it is now learned, was the wedded 
wife of Robert, Earl of Leicester — while posing as the Virgin 
Queen — and was the mother of Francis Bacon. 

It also discloses the existence of a second so-called Key- 
Word Cipher, of broader scope, running through all of Bacon's 
literary works, with instructions by which they may be de- 
ciphered to disclose other hidden dramatical and historical pro- 
ductions of larger importance and greater historical accuracy 
than those upon the printed pages which enfold them. These 
are found also to contain secret history, dangerous to Bacon, 
who sought by this means to transmit it to a future time in 
which he hoped the Ciphers would be discovered and the truth 
proclaimed. 

The method of the Word Cipher is shown in the deciphered 
Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, published simultaneously with this 
Third Edition, — also in the Tragedy of Robert, Earl of Essex, 
— and the Tragedy of Mary, Queen of Scots. 



THE TRAGEDY OF ANNE BOLEYN, 
Deciphered by Elizabeth Wells Gallup, 

One of tlfie Historical Dramas in Cipher named in the Bi- 
literal Cypher as concealed in the works of Bacon. 

Part I. 
Contains extracts from the Bi-literal, with Bacon's in- 
structions and the Keys by which this Tragedy has been ex- 
tracted fully illustrating the Word Cipher method of its re- 
construction. 

An appendix gives the editions used and pages on which 
may be found the scattered sections brought together in new 
sequence to form the new play. 

Included in Part I will also be found the decipherings made 
by Mrs. Gallup in the British Museum subsequent to the publi- 
cation of the Second Edition of the Bi-literal Cypher, and are 
from Old Editions appearing between 15T9 and 1590, establish- 
ing the earliest dates this Cypher appeared. They are placed 
here for the convenience of these having Second Editions only. 

THE TRAGICAL HISTORIE 

OF OUR LATE BEOTHEE, 

EGBERT, EAPL OF ESSEX. 

Deciphered by 'Orville W. Oiven, M. D. One of the Histori- 
cal Dramas in Cipher. 

THE HISTORICAL TRAGEDY OF MARY, QUEEN 

OF SCOTS. 

Deciphered by Orville W. Owen, M. D. One of the Histori- 
cial Dramas in Cipher. 

HOWAED PuBLISHI]SrG Co., 

Gay & BiED, Detroit, Michigan, U. S. A. 

London, England. 



CONTEIS^TS 

(of this volume) 

Frontispiece Portrait Elizabeth Wells Gallup 

Announcements 6 

Title Page "The Bi-literal Cypher" 11 

(Plates from the book) 

Contents of "Bi-literal Cypher" 

Personal 15 

Publishers Note. Third Edition 19 

De Augmentis, Original Title page 1624 21 

Cyphars in Advancement of Learning, 1605 22 

Cyphars in De Augmentis, "Wats Translation, 1640 23 

Bi-literarie Alphabet 24 

Bi-formed Alphabet 25 

Cicero's First Epistle — Method of deciphering 26 

Cicero's First Epistle — Cipher infold 27 

Tragedy of Anne Boleyn 29 

(Plates from the book) 

Preface 30 

Argument of the Play 35 

Keys for Deciphering 38 



FROM MAGAZINES, ETC. 

BACONIANA— LONDON : 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup — Descriptive 43 

— Explanatory 122 

—Henry VII 222 

Editorial — Book Review 74 

Connonbury Tower 227 

D. J. Klndersley— Henry VII 218 

COURT JOURNAL— LONDON: 

Fleming Fulcher Review 81 

COSMOPOLITAN— NEW YORK: 

Garrett P. Serviss Review 112 

FREE PRESS— ^DETROIT: 

Editorial, Book Review 69 

LITERARY WORLD— LONDON: 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup. Replies I-II 150 

NINETEENTH CENTURY AND AFTER— LONDON : 

W. H. Mallock, Review 94 

NEW YORK TIMES— LITERARY REVIEW: 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup— Reply to C. L. Dana 163 

PALL MALL MAGAZINE— LONDON: 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup — Descriptive 51 

Explanatory 126 

TIMES— LONDON: 

Elizabeth W. Gallup 144 

W. H. Mallock 169 

A. P. Sinnett 172 

A. P. Sinnett 176 

Parker Woodward 175 

REPLIES TO CRITICISMS: 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup 179 

Illustration of Method 198 

Fac-Simile Plates De Augmentis Scientiarum, London 

Ed., 1623 201 

Fac-Simile Plates Paris Ed., 1624 205 

Henry Irving, Princeton Address 211 

if 



THE 



Bi-literal Cypher 



of 



S'' Francis Bacon 



difcovered in his works 



AND DECIPHERED BY 



MI^S. ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP 



THIRD EDITION 



■t^j 



DETROIT. MICHIGAN. U. S. A.: 
HOWARD PUBLISHING COMPANY 

LONDON: 

GAY & BIRD 

a 3 Bedford St. 



CONTENTS. 
PART I. 

PAGE 

Personal — Mrs. Elizabeth Wells Gallup 1 

Explanatory Introduction First Edition 5 

Preface, Second Edition 15 

Argument 18 

Notes on the Shakespeare Plays 28 

Stenography in the time of Queen Elizabeth 35 

Francis Bacon, Biographical 39 

Ciphers 47 

Cyphars in Advancement of Learning, 1605 51 

Cyphars in De Augmentis 52 

Bi-literal Cipher Plan and Illustration 53 

Fac-simlle pages from De Augmentis, 1624 57 

Fac-simile pages from Novum Organum, 1620 63 

Fac-simile title page Vitae et Mortis 67 

Shakespeare Plays — Fac-simile Quarto Title Pages 69 

Publisher's Note 76 

BI-LITERAL CYPHER. 
DECIPHERED SECRET STORY. 1579 to 1590. 

Shepheard's Calender 1579 Anonymous 79 

The Araygnemient of Paris. .1584 George Peele 80 

The Mirrour of Modestie.. .1584 Robert Greene 82 

Planetomachia 1585 Robert Greene 87 

A Treatise of Melancholy. . .1586 T. Bright 89 

EuphTies-Morando 1587 Robert Greene 91 

Perimedes-Pandosto 1588 Robert Greene 93 

Spanish Masquerado 1589 Robert Greene 94 



12 



PART II. 
DECIPHERED SECRET STORY FROM 

EDMUND SPENSER: 

PAGE 

Complaints, 1591 1 

Colin Clout, 1595 3 

Faerie Queene, 1596 4 

Faerie Queene, second part 7 

SHAKESPEARE QUARTO: 

Richard Second, 1598 10 

GEORGE PEELE: 

David and Bethsabe. 1599 11 

SHAKESPEARE QUARTOS: 

Midsommer Night's Dream, 1600 12 

Midsommer Night's Dream, Fisher Ed 13 

Much Ado About Nothing, 1600 14 

Sir John Oldcastle and Merchant of Venice, Roberts Ed., 

1600 15 

Richard, Duke of York, 1600 18 

FRANCIS BACON: 

Treasons of Essex, 1601 20 

SHAKESPEARE QUARTO: 

London Prodigal, 1605 23 

FRANCIS BACON: 

Advancement of Learning, 1605 25 

SHAKESPEARE QUARTOS: 

King Lear, 1608 33 

King Henry The Fifth, 1608 U 

Pericles, 1609 35 

Hamlet, 1611 ' 36 

Titus Andronicus, 1611 38 

13 



EDMUND SPENSER: 

PAGE 

Shepheards Calender, 1611 40 

Faerie Queene, 1613 43 

BEN JONSON: 

Plays in Folio, 1616 49 

SHAKESPEARE QUARTOS: 

Richard The Second, 1615 72 

Merry Wives of Windsor, 1619 73 

Contention of York and Lancaster, 1619 74 

Pericles, 1619 77 

Yorkshire Tragedy, 1619 78 

Romeo and Juliet, no date 79 

ROBERT GREENE: 

A Quip For an Upstart Courtier, 1620 80 

FRANCIS BACON: 

Novum Organum, 1620 81 

The Parasceve 133 

Henry The Seventh, 1622 136 

CHRISTOPHER MARLOWE: 

Edward The Second, 1622 151 

FRANCIS BACON: 

Historia Vitae & Mortis, 1623 153 

SHAKESPEARE PLAYS: 

First Folio, 1623 165 

ROBERT BURTON: 

Anatomy of Melancholy, 1628 218 

"Argument of the Iliad" 220 

FRANCIS BACON: 

De Augmentis Scientiarum, 1624 310 

"Argument of the Odysses" 313 

New Atlantis, 1635 334 

Sylva Sylvarum, 1635, Rawley's Preface 339 

Natural History 341 

William Rawley's Note 368 



14 



PERSONAL. 

TO THE READER: 

The discovery of the existence of the Bi-literal Cipher 
of Francis Bacon, found embodied in his works, and the 
deciphering of what it tells, has been a work arduous, ex- 
hausting and prolonged. It is not ended, but the results 
of the work so far brought forth, are submitted for study 
and discussion, and open a new and large field of investi- 
gation and research, which cannot fail to interest all stu- 
dents of the earlier literature that has come down to us as 
a mirror of the past, and in many respects has been adopted 
as models for the present. 

Seeking for things hidden, the mysterious, elusive and 
unexpected, has a fascination for many minds, as it has 
for my own, and this often prompts to greater effort than 
more manifest and material things would command. To 
this may be attributed, perhaps, the triumph over diffi- 
culties which have seemed to me, at times, insurmountable, 
the solution of problems, and the following of ways tor- 
tuous and obscure, which have been necessary to bring out, 
as they appear in the following pages, the hidden mes- 
sp.ges which Francis Bacon so securely buried in his writ- 
ings, that three hundred years of reading and close study 
nave not until now uncovered them. 

This Bi-literal Cipher is found in the Italic letters that 
appear in such unusual and unexplained prodigality in the 
original editions of Bacon's works. Students of these old 
editions have been impressed with the ^extraordinary num- 
ber of words and passages, often non-important, printed in 
Italics, where no known rule of construction would require 
their use. There has been no reasonable explanation of 
this until now it is found that they were so used for the 

15 



'■I PEKSONAL 

purposes of this Cipher. These letters are seen to be in 
two forms — two fonts of type — with marked differences. 
In the Capitals these are easily discerned, but the distin- 
g'uishing features in the small letters, from age of the 
books, blots and poor printing, have been more difficult to 
classify, and close examination and study have been re- 
quired to separate and sketch out the variations, and edu- 
cate the eye to distinguish them. 

How I found the Cipher, its difficulties, methods of 
working, and outline of what the several books contain, 
will more fully appear in the explanatory introduction. 

In assisting Dr. Owen in the preparation of the later 
books of "Sir Francis Bacon's Cipher Story," recently pub- 
lished, and in the study of the great Word-Cipher discov- 
ered by him, in which is incorporated Bacon's more exten- 
sive, more complete and important writings, I became con- 
vinced that the very full explanation found in De Aug- 
mentis, of the bi-literal method of cipher-writing, was 
something more than a mere treatise on the subject. I 
applied the rules given to the peculiarly Italicised words 
and "letters in two forms," as they appear in the photo- 
graphic Fac-simile of the original 1623, Folio edition, of 
the Shakespeare Plays. The disclosures, as they appear in 
this volume, were as great a surprise to me, as they will 
be to my readers. Original editions of Bacon's known 
works were then procured, as well as those of other authors 
named in these, and claimed by Bacon as his own. The 
story deciphered from these will appear under the sev- 
eral headings. 

From the disclosures found in all these, it is evident 
that Bacon expected this Bi-literal Cipher would be the first 
to be discovered, and that it would lead to the discovery 
of his principal, or Word-Cipher, which it fully explains, 
and to which is intrusted the larger subjects he desired to 
have preserved. This order has been reversed, in fact, and 
the earlier discovery of the Word-Cipher, by Dr. Owen, 
becomes a more remarkable achievement, being entirely 

16 



PERSONAL. 3 

evolved without the aids which Bacon had prepared in this, 
for its elucidation. 

The proofs are overwhelming and irresistible that Bacon 
was the author of the delightful lines attributed to Spen- 
ser, — the fantastic conceits of Peele and Greene, — the his- 
torical romances of Marlowe, — the immortal plays and 
poems put forth in Shakespeare's name, as well as the 
Anatomy of Melancholy of Burton. 

The removal of these masques, behind which Bacon 
concealed himself, may change the names of some of our 
idols. It is, however, the matter and not the name that 
appeals to our intelligence. 

The plays of Shakespeare lose nothing of their dramatic 
power or wondrous beauty, nor deserve the less admiration 
of the scholar and critic, because inconsistencies are re- 
moved in the knowledge that they came from the brain of 
the greatest student and writer of that age, and were not 
a "flash of genius" descended upon one of peasant birth, 
less noble history, and of no preparatory literary attain- 
ments. 

The Shepherds' Calendar is not less sweetly poetical, 
because Francis Bacon appropriated the name of Spenser, 
several years after his death, under which to put forth the 
musical measures, that had, up to that time, only appeared 
as the production of some Muse without a name; nor will 
Faerie Queene lose ought of its rythmic beauty or romantic 
interest from change of name upon the title page. 

The supposed writings of Peele, Greene and Marlowe 
are not the less worthy, because really written by one 
greater than either. 

The remarkable similarity in the dramatic writings at- 
tributed to Greene, Peele, Marlowe and Shakespeare has 
attracted much attention, and the biographers of each have 
claimed that both style and subject-matter have been imi- 
tated, if not appropriated, by the others. The practical 
explanation lies in the fact that one hand wrote them all. 

17 



4 PERSONAL. 

I fully appreciate what it means to bring forth new 
truth from imexpected and unknown fields, if not in ac- 
cord with accented theories and long held beliefs. "For 
what a man had rather were true, he more readily be- 
lieves," — is one of Bacon's truisms that finds many illus- 
trations. 

I appreciate what it means to ask strong minds to change 
long standing literary convictions, and of such I venture 
to ask the withholding of judgment until study shall have 
made the new matter familiar, with the assurance mean- 
while, upon my part, of the absolute veracity of the work 
which is here presented. Any one possessing the original 
books, who has sufficient patience and a keen eye for form, 
can work out and verify the Cipher from the illustrations 
given. Nothing is left to choice, chance, or the imagina- 
tion. The statements which are disclosed are such as could 
not be foreseen, nor imagined, nor created, nor can there be 
found reasonable excuse for the hidden writings, except for 
the purposes narrated, which could only exist concerning, 
and be described by, Francis Bacon. 

I would beg that the readers of this book will bring to 
the consideration of the work minds free from prejudice, 
judging of it with the same intelligence and impartiality 
they would themselves desire, if the presentation were their 
own. Otherwise the work will, indeed, have been a thank- 
less task. 

To doubt the ultimate acceptance of the truths brought 
to light would be to distrust that destiny in which Bacon 
had such an abiding faith for his justification, and which, 
in fact, after three centuries, has lifted the veil, and 
brought us to estimate the character and accomplishments, 
trials and sorrows of that great genius, with a feeling of 
nearness and personal sympathy, far greater than has been 
possible from the partial knowledge which we have here- 
tofore enjt)yed. 

ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP. 

Detroit, March 1st, 1899. 

18 



PUBLISHERS' NOTE. 

THIRD EDITION. 

The publication of the second edition of the Bi-literal 
Cypher of Francis Bacon, which embraced the period of his 
Cipher writing between 1590 and the end of his career, 
emphasized the importance of finding the earlier writings 
— preceding 1590. The old books necessary to the re- 
search could not be procured in America, and during the 
summer of 1900 Mrs. Gallup and her assistant, Miss Kate 
E. Wells, visited England to carry on the work in that 
treasure house of early literature, the British Museum. 
The investigations yielded rich returns, for in Shepheard's 
Calender of 1579 was found the commencement of what 
proved to be an important part of Bacon's life work. 

Following Shepheard's Calender, the works between 
1579 and 1590, so far deciphered, are: 

Araygnement of Paris, 1584; Mirrour of Modestie, 
1584. 

Planetomachia, 1585. 

Treatise of Melancholy, 1586. Two editions of this 
were issued the same year, with differing Italics. The first 
ends with an incomplete cipher word which is completed in 
the second for the continued narration, thus making evident 
which was first published, unless they were published at 
the same time. 

Euphues, 1587 ; Morando, 1587. These two also join 
together, with an incomplete word at the end of the first 
finding its completion in the commencement of the Cipher 
in the second. 

Perimedes the Blacke-smith, 1588 ; Pandosto, 1588. 
These two also join together. 

19 



Spanish Masquerade, 1589. Two editions of this work 
bear date the same year, but have different Italicising. In 
one edition the Cipher Story is complete, closing with the 
signature: "Fr., Prince." In the other the story is not 
complete, the book ending with an incomplete cipher word, 
the remainder of which will be found in some work of a 
near date which has not yet been indicated. 

Several months were spent in following, through these 
old books, the thread of the concealed story until it joined 
the work which had already been published. Overstrained 
eye-sight, from the close study of the different forms of 
Italic letters, and consequent exhaustion on the part of 
Mrs. Gallup, compelled a cessation of the work before all 
that would have been desirable to know concerning that 
early period was deciphered ; and while these are not all the 
works in which Cipher will be found, between the years 
1579 and 1590, they are sufficient unmistakably to connect 
the earlier writings with those of later date which had 
already been deciphered — as published in the Bi-literal 
Cypher — so that we now know the Cipher writings were 
being continuously infolded in Bacon's works, for a period 
of about forty-six years, from the first to the last of his lit- 
erary productions, including some matter he had prepared, 
which was published by Rawley subsequent to 1626. 

These few pages of deciphered matter, now added to that 
published in the Second Edition, have a unique distinction 
in the costliness of their production, but they are of ines- 
timable value, historically, as well as from a literary point 
of view, in demonstrating with certainty the scope and 
completeness of the Cipher plan which has so long hidden 
the secrets of a most eventful period. 



20 



FRANCISCI 

BARONI S 

DE VERVLAMIO, 

VICE-COMITIS 



SANGTI ALBANI. 

DE DIG NIT ATE ET JVGMBNTiS 

SClENTIARfM. 

L I B R I I X. 
^ D KEG E M S y P^ M 




luxta Exemplar Londini Itepreflum. 

P A R I S I I S, 
Typis Petri METTAYERjTypographiK'^giJ 

~~M. DC. X X I V. 



Of the Advancement of Learning. 



(London, 1605.) 



CYPHARS 



For C Y p H A R s ; they are commonly in Letters 
or Alphabets, but may bee in Wordes. The kindes 
of C Y p H A R s, (befides the Simple Cyphars 
with Changes, and intermixtures of N v l l e s, and 
Nonsignificant s) are many, according to 
the Nature or Rule of the infoulding : W h e e l e ■ 
Cyphars, Ka y-C yphars, Dovbles, 
&c. But the vertues of them, whereby they are 
to be preferred, are three ; that they be not labor- 
ious to write and reade; that they bee impofsible 
to difcypher; and in fome cafes, that they bee 
without fufpition. The higheft Degree whereof, 
is to write Omnia Per Omnia; which is 
vndoubtedly pofsible, with a proportion Quintuple 
at moft, of the writing infoulding, to the writing 
infoulded, and no other reftrainte whatfoeuer. 
This Arte of Cypheringe, hath for Relatiue, an Art 
of Difcypheringe \ by fuppofition vnprofitable ; but, 
as things are, of great vfe. For fuppofe that 
Cyphars were well mannaged, there bee Multitudes 
of them which exclude the Difcypherer. But in 
regarde of the rawneffe and vnskilfulneffe of the 
handes, through which they paffe, the greateft 
Matters, are many times carryed in the weakeft 
Cyphars. 

22 



De Augmentis Scientiarum 

(Translation, Gilbert Wats, 1640.) 



Wherefore let us come to C y p h a R s. Their kinds 
are many, as Cyphars Cimple; Cyphars intermixt with 
SX^idloes, or non - fignificant Characters; Cyphars of 
double Letters under one Character; Wheele-Cyphars ; Kay- 
Cyphars; Cyphars of Words; Others. But the virtues 
of them whereby they are to be preferr'd are Three; 
That they be ready, and not laborious to write; That they be 
jure, and lie not open to Deciphering; And lafily, if it be 
pofsible, that they be managed without fufpition. 

But that jealoufies may be taken away, we will 
annexe an other invention, which, in truth, we 
devifed in our youth, when we were at Paris: and 
is a thing that yet feemeth to us not worthy to be 
loft. It containeth the higheft degree of Cypher, which 
is to fignifie omnia per omnia, yet fo as the writing 
infolding, may beare a quintuple proportion to the 
writing infolded; no other condition or reftriction 
whatfoever is required. It fhall be performed thus: 
Firft let all the Letters of the Alphabet, by tranfpo- 
fition, be refolved into two Letters onely ; for the 
tranfpofition of two Letters by five placings will be 
fufhcient for 32. Differences, much more for 24. 
which is the number of the Alphabet. The example 
of fuch an Alphabet is on this wife. 

23 



An Example of a 'Bi-literarie Alphabet. 

<^ m C T> E F 

oAaaaa aaaah aaaba. aaabb. aabaa. aabab. 

G H I K L 0[4 

aabba aabbb ahaaa. abaab. ababa. ababb. 

abbaa. abbab. abbba. abbbb. baaaa. baaab. 

7 V JV X Y Z 

baaba. baabb. babaa. babab. babba. babbb. 

Neither is it a fmall matter thefe Cypher-Characteri 
have, and may performe : For by this Art a way is 
opened, whereby a man may expreffe and fignifie 
the intentions of his minde, at any diftance of 
place, by objects which may be prefented to the 
eye, and accommodated to the eare : provided thofe 
objects be capable of a twofold difference onely ; 
as by Bells^ by Trumpets, by Lights and Torches, 
by the report of Muskets, and any inftruments of 
like nature. But to purfue our enterprife, when 
you addreffe your felfe to write, refolve your in- 
ward-infolded Letter into this 'Bi-literarie Alphabet. 
Say the interiour Letter be 

Fuge. 

Example of Solution. 

F V G E 

aabab. baabb. aabba, aabaa. 

Together with this, you muft have ready at 
hand a 'Bi-formed Alphabet, which may reprefent all 
the Letters of the Common Alphabet, as well Capitall 
Letters as the Smaller Characters in a double 
forme, as may fit every mans occafion. 

24 



An Example oj a 'Bi-formed Alphabet. 

(a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b 

\j{Aaa, mBhh COccT>I)dd EEee FFff 

i a b a b abababab abababab a b a b 

\GGgg HHbh Jlii KKkh LLll OAMmm 

( a b a b a b a b a b a b a b a b abababab 

Xtl^Nnn OOoo TPpp Q^Qqq TiRrr SSss 

{ ababababab a b a b a bab abababab 

\ 7 TttVVvvuii WWww XXxx YYyy ZZ^z 

Now to the interiour letter, which is Biliterate, 
you fhall fit a biformed exteriour letter, which fhall 
anfwer the other, letter for letter, and afterwards 
fet it downe. Let the exteriour example be, 

[Manere te volo, donee venero. 

An Example of Accommodation. 

F V G E 

a a b a b. b a a b b. a a b b a. a a baa. 

(Manere te volo donee venero 

We have annext likewife a more ample example 
of the cypher of writing omnia per omnia: An interiour 
letter, which to expreffe, we have made choice of 
a Spartan letter fent once in a Scytale or round 
cypher'd ftaffe. 

Spartan Dispatch. 

z/lll is lost. {Mindarus is killed. The soldiers 
want food. We can neither get hence nor stay longer 
here. 

An exteriour letter, taken out of the firft Epiftle 
of Cicero, wherein a Spartan Letter is involved. 

25 



Cicero's hirst Epistle. 



Jn all duty or rather piety towards 

a a. ana \a- bah a\ a 6 a b a\ii b a a a\b a aab\ubab 
A I L \l\i\s\L 

you, I satisfy everybody except myself. 

a\ a b b a b\i a a a b \ b a a b a\a b a b b\a b a a a \ a b b a a\ a 

I o \s\t\m\i\n\ 

(My self J never satisfy. For so great are 

a a b b\a a a a a\b a a a a\ b a a b b I b a a a b \ a, b a a a\ b a a 

d\a\r\u\ S I I \ S 

the services which you have rendered me, 

a b\a 6 a a b\ab a a a \ a b a b a\ a b a b a\a abaa\aaab b\ b 
\ K \ I \ L \ L 1^1 D \ 

that , seeing you did not rest in your en- 

a a b a I a a b b b\a a b a a\b a aab\abba b\a b a b a\ a a 
T \ H \ E \ S \ O \ L \ 

deavoiirs on my behalf till the thing was 

abb\abaaa\aa b a a\b a a a a \ b a a a b\b a b a a\a a a a a\ 
D \ / I £ \ a \ S \ IV \ A I 

done, 7 feel as if life had lost all its sweet- 

abba a \ b aa b a\a a b a b\a b bab\abba b\aa abb \ b a b <ia I 
N \T\F\0\0\D\iy\ 

ness, because 7 cannot do as much in this 

a a b a d\a a ci b a\a a a a a \ a b b a a \ a b b u a\ et a b a a\a b 

£ \ C \ A |JV| iV^ l^'l 

cause of yours. The occasions are these: 

a a a \ b a a b a \ a a b b b \ a a b a a\b a a a a\a abb a\a a b a 

I \ T \ H \ E \ R \ G \ E 

zAmmonius, the king' s ambassador, open- 

a \ b a a b a\a a bbblaaba a\abbaa\aaaba\aaba 
I T \ H \ E \ N \ C \ E 

ly besieges us with money. The business 

a\a b b a a\a b b a b \b aaaa\baaal> I baa b a\a a a a a\b 
\ N \ O \ R \ S I T 1^1 

is carried on through the same creditor s 

a b b a\a b a b a \ a b b a b\a b b a a\a a b h a\ a a b a a\ b a a a n\ 
Y \ L \ O \ N \ Q \ E \ R \ 

who were employed in it when you were 

a a b b b\a a b a a\b a a a a \ a a b a a\a a a a a a a a a a 
H \ E \ R \ E I 

here S-c. 

(Note )— This Translation from Spedding, Ellis & Heath Ed. 

26 



(REPRODUCTION .) 

Epistle. 

Jn all duty or rather piety towards you, I satisfy 
everybody except myself. Myself J never satisfy. 
For so great are the services which you have rendered 
me, that, seeing you did not rest in your endeavours 
on my behalf till the thing was done, 7 feel as if life 
Jiad lost all its sweetness, because J cannot do as 
much in this cause of yours. The occasions are these: 
zAmmoniiis, the kings ambassador^ openly besieges us 
with money. The business is carried on through the 
same creditors who were employed in it when you 
were here S-c 

Cipher infolded. 

Ml is lost. {Mindarus is killed. The soldiers 
want food. We can neither get hence nor stay longer 
here. 

The knowledge of Cyphering, hath drawne on with it 
a knowledge relative unto it, which is the knowledge 
of Difcyphering, or of Difcreting Cyphers, though a man 
were utterly ignorant of the Alphabet of the Cypher, 
and the Capitulations of fecrecy paft between the 
Parties. Certainly it is an Art which requires great 
paines and a good witt and is [as the other was] 
confecrate to the Counfels of Princes: yet notwith- 
ftanding by diligent previfion it may be made un- 
profitable, though, as things are, it be of great ufe. 
For if good and faithfull Cyphers were invented & 
practifed, many of them would delude and foreftall 
all the Cunning of the Decypherer, which yet are ver)' 
apt and eafie to be read or written: but the rawneffe 
and unskilfulneffe of Secretaries, and Clarks in the 
Courts of Princes, is fuch, that many times the 
greateft matters are committed to futile and weake 
Cyphers. 

27 



THE 



TRAGEDY OF 

Anne Boleyn. 



A DRAMA IN CIPHER 

FOUND IN THE WORKS OF 

SIR FRANCIS BACON. 



DECIPHERED BY 

ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP. 



DETROIT, MICHIGAN, U. S. A.: 

HOWARD PUBLISHING COMPANY. 
LONDON: 

GAY & BIRD, 
22 Bedford St. Strand. 



PEEFACE. 

The Cipher discoveries in some of the literature of the 
Elizabethan period, as set forth in Francis Bacon s Bi- 
literal Cypher — a book recently published in America and 
England — are most strange and important. To those not 
familiar with them, a few words are requisite for an under- 
standing of the methods of the production of this Cipher 
play — The Tragedy of Anne Boleyn. 

Two principal Ciphers have been found to exist in the 
works of Bacon. The first, the Bi-literal, by the use of 
Italic letters in different forms, concealed the rules and 
directions for writing out a second of greater scope — a so- 
called Word Cipher, in which key words indicate sections 
of similar matter, that, brought together in a new sequence, 
tell a different story. Both were invented by Bacon in his 
youth. The primary, or Bi-literal Cypher, is fully ex- 
plained in De Augmentis Scientiarum, but it is only re- 
cently that it has been found to exist in the Italic printing 
of a number of the books of the Elizabethan era — books 
ascribed to different authors but now proved to have been 
written by Bacon. 

On pages following are extracts from the Bi-literal Cy- 
pher, as published, relating in the words of the inventor 
himself the manner of using the Key- Word Cipher for the 
segregation and reconstruction of the hidden narratives, 
infolded in the pages as originally printed, with which we 
are familiar. These directions are fragmentary, scattered 
through many of the books deciphered, and are many times 
repeated in varying forms of expression. 

The more important only are here gathered, which, with 
the "Argument" and the keys, now given, of this tragedy. 



31 



II PRE3FACE. 

will outline the plan of this work. It may be interesting to 
know that the use of the key words is progressive, and that 
a small number only are used at one time : the first six or 
seven writing the prologue, a few of the next the opening 
scenes of the play, and so on through the entire work, some 
being dropped as others are taken up successively until all 
have been used. An appendix gives the book and page 
from which the lines are taken that have been brought to- 
gether as the "great architect or master-builder directed." 

In the reconstruction, especially when prose is changed 
to verse, the order of the words is slightly changed to meet 
the requirements of "rythmic measure in the Iambic." 
The great author used large parts of many scenes in two 
distinct plays — open and concealed — now and then with 
the same dramatis personae, again with others clearly indi- 
cated as belonging, historically, to these particular scenes. 
This fact may jostle our ideas somewhat, as we find new 
speakers using the familiar lines, but there is an added 
interest, when the transposition gives the accuracy of his- 
tory to the beauty of dramatic expression. This seems the 
reverse of the natural order, but it is seeming only, for the 
literary world became acquainted with the rewritten plays 
three centuries before the hidden originals came to light. 

In the banquet scene of this tragedy, the fi"rst part is 
almost identical with that of Henry Eighth, although — 
when "like joins like," something from Macbeth, from 
Hamlet, from Romeo and Juliet, etc., etc., is added — 
while other diversions of that festival night are not given 
openly in any of the works. The handkerchief scenes of 
the imagined tragedy of Othello belong to this real, but 
concealed, tragedy of Anne Boleyn, and the accusations 
against the Queen of Sicilia are a part of the charge against 
this martyred Queen ; the reply, a part of the pa,thetic but 
brave response she made. The second part was never be- 
fore in any published drama. 



32 



PREFACE. Ill 

It would seem that Bacon learned from Cicero the 
method of preparing matter which could with slight varia- 
tions be adapted to more than one purpose. We find this 
in the Advancement of Learning (1605, p. 52). 

"And Cicero himselfe, being broken unto it by great ex- 
perience, delivereth it plainely; That whatsoever a man 
shall have occasion to speake of, (if he will take the 
paines) he may have it in effect premediate, and handled 
in these. So that when bee cometh to a particular, he shall 
have nothing to doe, but to put too I^ames and times, and 
places ; and such other Circumstances of Individuals." 

A little further on (p. 56), is an instance where an in- 
quiry about the tablets in ISTeptune's Temple is ascribed to 
Diagoras, while in the Apothegms this same question is put 
in the mouth of Bion. And, in the First Folio of the 
Shakespeare Plays, a very marked example occurs in Romeo 
and Juliet. 

Romeo speaking, says: 

"The gray ey'd morne smiles on the frowning night, 
Checkring the Easterne Clouds with streakes of light. 
And darknesse fleckel'd like a drunkard reeles, 
From forth dayes pathway, made by Titans wheeles." 

Then almost immediately after, the Friar gives the same 
lines, with very slight but distinctive changes : 

"The gray ey'd morne smiles on the frowning night, 
Checkring the Easterne Cloudes with streaks of light, 
And fleckled darknesse like a drunkard reeles, 
From forth dales path, and Titans -burning wheeles.'' 

The modern editors cut out one quatrain as a supposed 
mistake, the decipherer discovers by the keys and joining- 
words that each has a place — the first in one work, and the 
second in another. 

As the tragical events of this period in the history of the 
ill-fated queen, now known to be Bacon's ancestress, have 



33 



iV PREFACE, 

little by little unfolded in the deciphering, there has been a 
deepening sense of the pathos of the story. Like dissolving 
views the scenes appear, and fade, and this mightiness 
meets misery so soon that we feel the shock. There is the 
gentle Anne's appearance at the banquet, "when Xing 
Henry for the first time cometh truely under the spell of 
her beautie" — his infatuation — his determination that 
nothing should stand in the way of making her his wife — 
the divorce from Katherine — the coronation — the disap- 
proval of the people, nofof Anne but of the King — the in- 
sulting song at the coronation festivities — the birth of 
Elizabeth, Bacon's mother, and the King's disappointment 
that the princess ■ was not a prince. Later there is the 
King's fickleness, which prompted the false charges against 
his wife — the mockery of the trial — the true nobleness of 
the victim — the injustice of her condemnation — the pa- 
thetic message to the King, as she was led to the scaffold — 
the cruelty of her execution. 

It is no wonder that Bacon felt this deeply, nor that 
"every act and scene is a tender sacrifice, and an incense to 
her sweet memory." 

ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP. 

Detroit, November, 1901. 



34 



ARGUMENT OF THE PLAY. 

As may bee well knowne unto you, tli' questio' of Eliza- 
beth, her legitimacie, made her a Protestant, for the Pope 
had not recognis'd th' union, tho' it were royale, which her 
sire made with f ayre Anne Boleyn. Still we may see that 
despite some restraining feare, it suited her to dallie with 
the question, to make a faint shew of settling the mater as 
her owne co'sie'ce dictated, if we take th' decisions of 
facts ; but the will of th' remorse-tost king left no doubt 
in men's minds concerning th' former marriage, in fact, as 
th' crowne was giv'n first to Mary, his daughter of that 
marriage, before commi'g to Elizabeth. 

In th' storie of my most infortunate grandmother, the 
sweet ladie who saw not th' headsman's axe when shee 
went forth proudly to her coronation, you shall read of a 
sadnesse that touches me neere, partlie because of neere- 
nesse in bloud, partlie from a firme beliefe and trust in 
her innocencie. Therefore every act and scene of this play 
of which I speake, is a tende' sacrifice, and an incense to 
her sweete memorie. It is a plea to the generations to 
come for a just judgement upon her life, whilst also giving 
the world one of the noblest o' my plays, hidden in Cy'hre 
in many other works. 

A short argument, and likewise th' keies, are giv'n to 
ayde th' decypherer when it is to be work'd out as I wish. 
This doth tell th' story with sufiicient clearnes to guide you 
to our hidden storie. 

This opeth at th' palace, when King Henry for the 
first time cometh truely under the spell of her beautie, — 
then in th' highest perfection of dainty grace, fresh, un- 
spoiled, — and the charrae of youthlie manners. It is 



35 



XVIII ARGUMENT. 

thought this was that inquisition which brought out feares 
regarding th' marriage contracted with Katharine of Arra- 
gon, so that none greatly wond'red whe' prolonged consul- 
tation of the secret voyce in his soule assur'd the questioner 
noe good could ever come from the union. Acti'g upon 
this conviction he doth confer money and titles upon his 
last choise to quiet objections on score of unmeetnes. 

But tho' an irksome thing, truth shall be told. Tho' it 
be ofttimes a task, — if selfe-imposed, not by any meanes 
th' lesse, but more wearisome, since the work hath noe 
voyce of approvall or praise, — I intend its completion. For 
many simple causes th' historic of a man's life cometh 
from acts that we see through stayned glasse darkelie, and 
of th' other sexe, a man doth perceyve lesse, if possible, 
but th' picture that I shall heere give is limn'd most care- 
fully. However m' pen hath greatly digress' d, and Lo 
returne. 

Despite this mark of royall favour, a grave matter like 
the divorcement of a royall spouse to wed a maide, suited 
not with fayre Anne's notions of justice, and with a sweete 
grace she made answere when the King sued for favour : — 
"I am not high in birth as would befit a Queene, but I am 
too good to become your mistresse." So there was no waye 
to compasse his desires save to wring a decree out o' th' 
Pope and wed th' maide, not a jot regarding her answer 
unlesse to bee the more eager to have his waye. 

Th' love Lord Percy shew'd my lady, although so 
frankly return'd, kept the wish turning, turning as a rest- 
less mill. Soone he resolv'd on proof of his owne spirit, doe 
th' Pope how he might, and securing a civill decree, pri- 
vately wedded th' too youthfull Anne, and hid her for space 
of severall dales untill th' skies could somewhat cleare ; but 
when th' earlie sumer came, in hope that there might 
soone bee borne to them an heyre of th' desir'd kinde, 



86 



OF THE PLAY. XIX 

order'd willinglie her coronation sparing noe coste to make 
it outvie anie other. 

And when she was borne along, surrounded by soft 
white tissew, shielded by a canopie of white, whilst she is 
wafted onwards, you would say an added charme were to 
paint the lillie, or give the rose perfume. 

This was onely th' beginning of a triumph, bright as 
briefe, — in a short space 'twas ore. Henry chose to con- 
sider th' infant princesse in the light of great anger of a 
just God brought upon him for his sinnes, but bearing this 
with his daring spirit, he compelleth the Actes of Suprem- 
acy and Succession, which placed him at the head of the 
Church of England, in th' one case, and made his heires 
by Queene Anne th' successours to th' throne. Untill that 
time, onely male heyres had succeeded to th' roiall power 
and the act occasioned much surprise amongst our nobilitie. 

But Henry rested not the'. The lovelinesse of Anne 
and her natural opennesse of manner, so potent to winne 
th' weake heart o' th' King, awaken'd suspition and much 
cruell jealousie when hee saw th' gay courtiers yielding to 
th' spell of gracefull gentility, — heighten'd by usage for- 
rayn, as also at th' English Court. But if truth be said, 
th' fancy had taken him to pay lovi'g court unto the faire 
Jane Seymour, who was more beautifull, and quite young, 
— but also most ordinary as doth regard personall manner, 
and th' qualitie that made th' Queene so pleasing, — Lady 
Jane permitting marks of gracious favour t' be freelie 
offered. 

And the Queene, unfortunately for her secret hope, 
surpris'd them in a tender scene. Sodaine grief e orewhelm- 
ing her so viole'tlie, she swound before them, and a little 
space thereafter the infant sonne so constantly desir'd, 
borne untimely, disappointed once more this selfish mon- 
arch. This threw him into great fury, so that he was 
cruellie harsh where [he] should give comfort and sup- 



37 



2CX ARGUMENT, 

port, throwing so much blame upon the gentle Queene, 
that her heart dyed within her not long after soe sadde 
ending of a mother, her hopes. 

Under pretexte of beleeving gentle Queene Anne to be 
guilty of unfaithfullnesse, Henry had her convey' d to Lon- 
don Tower^ and subjected her to such ignominy as one can 
barelie beleeve, ev'n basely laying to her charge the 
gravest sins, and summoning a jury of peeres delivered the 
Queene for tryal and sentence. His act doth blacken 
pitch. Ev'n her father, sitting amidst the peeres before 
whom shee was tried, exciteth not so much astonishment 
since hee was forc'd thereto. 

Henry's will was done, but hardly could hee restraine 
the impatience that sent him forth from his pallace at th' 
hour of her execution to an eminence neare by, in order 
to catche th' detonation (ation) of th' field peece whose 
hollow tone tolde the moment at which th' cruell axe fell, 
and see the blacke flag, that signall which floated wide to 
tell the world she breath'd no more. 

Th' hast with which hee then went forward with his 
marriage, proclaym'd the reall rigor or frigidity of his 
hart. It is by all men accompted strange, this subtile 
power by which soe many of the peeres could be forc'd to 
passe sentence upon this lady, when proof es of guilt were 
nowhere to bee produced. In justice to a memorie dear 
to myselfe, I must aver that it is far from cleare yet, upon 
what charge shee was found worthie of death. It must of 
neede have beene some quiddet of th' lawe, that chang'd 
some harmlesse words into anything one had in minde, for 
in noe other waye could speech of hers be made wrongfull. 
Having fayl'd to prove her untrue, nought could bring 
about such a resulte, had this not (have) beene accom- 
plish'd. 

Thus was her good fame made a reproache, and time 
hath not given backe that priceles treasure. If my plaie 



38. 



OF THE PLAY. XXI 

shal shew this most clearly, I shall be co'tente. And as 
for my r©iall grandsire, whatever honour hath beene lost 
by such a course, is re-gain'd by his descendants from the 
union, through this lovi'g justification of Anne Bulle', his 
murther'd Queene. 

Before I go further with instructions, I make bold to 
say that th' benefits we who now live in our free England 
reape [are] from her faith and unfayling devotion to th' 
advancement, that she herselfe promoting, beheld well 
undertaken. It was her most earnest beliefe in this re- 
markable and widelie spread effecte on th' true prosperitie 
of the realme, and not a love o' dignity or power, — if the 
bvidence of workes be taken, — that co'strain'd her to take 
upon her th' responsibility of roialtie. And I am fullie 
perswaded in mine owne minde that had shee lived to carry 
out all th' work, her honours, no doubt, had outvied those 
of her world-wide famed and honour'd daughter who con- 
tinu'd that which had beene so well commenc'd. 

I am aware many artes waned in the raignes of 
Edward and bloodie Mary, also that their recovery must 
have requir'd patient attention and the expenditure of 
money my mother had no desire so to imploy, having many 
other things at that time by which th' coffers were drayn'd 
subtly ; but that it must require f arre greater perseverance 
in order to begin so noble work, devising th' plannes and 
ayding in their execution, cannot be impugn'd. Many 
times these things do not shewe lightness or th' vanitie 
which some have laid to her charge. 

However th' play doth reveale this better, f arre, then 1 
wish t' give it in this Cypher, therefore I begge that it 
shall bee written out and kept as a perpetual monument of 
my wrong'd, but innocent ancestresse. 

My keies mentio'd in the beginning of this most help- 
full work, will follow in this place : — 



39 



XXII KEYS OF THE PLAY. 

The King Henry Sevent, Kath'rine th' Infanta, 
Prince Arthur, Catholicke Spaine, Prince of Wales, King 
Henry th' Eight, Rome, nu'cio. Pope, Protestant, Anne 
Bullen, prelate, Wolsey, divorce, fury, excommunication, 
France, Francis First, marriage, ceremony, brother, pa- 
geant, barge, Richmond, Greenwich, Tower, procession, 
cloth, tissue, panoply, canopy, cloth o' gold, litter, bearing- 
staves, pageant, streets, coronation, crowne of Edward, 
purple robe, roiall ermine, mace, th' sword, wand, esses, 
French, Spanish ambassadours, advance-guards, mayor, 
dutchesse, Duke Sulfolke, Xorfolke, Marquesse Dorset, 
Bishop London, same Winchester, th' Knights of th' Gar- 
ter, Lord Chancellour, judges, Surrey, Earle, quirrestres, 
lords, ladies, et al., Westminster, Rochford, Wiltshire, 
manors, castles, land, valew, titles, Marchionesse of Pem- 
brooke, ports, countesses, roiall scepter, stile, power, title, 
pompe, realme, artes, advancement, liberty, treasure, warre, 
treaty, study, benefit, trade, priest, monastery, restitution, 
acts, supremacy, succession, Elizabeth, daughter, sonne, 
heyres, unfaithfulnesse, treason, Xorris, Weston, subtile 
trimnph, hate, losse, evill, jealousie, love, beautie, Tower, 
tryall, proofe, sentry, sentence, executed, burning, choyce, 
the axe, block, uncover'd face, report, black-flag, freedom, 
marriage-vow, Edward. 

As hath most frequentlie bin said these will write th' 
play, but th' foregoing abridgeme't, or argument, wil ayde 
you. In good hope of saving th' same from olde Father 
Time's ravages, heere have I hidden this Cypher play. To 
you I entruste th' taske I, myselfe, shall never see com- 
plete, it is probable, but soe firme is my conviction that it 
must before long put up its leaves like th' plant in th' 
sunne, that I rest contente awaiting that time. 



40 



CONCERNING THE 

Bi-LiTERAL Cypher 



PROS AND CONS 
OF THE CONTROVERSY 



THE BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF FRAISTCIS BACOK. 

ARTICLES FROM MAGAZINES AND OTHER SOURCES. 

In the following pages will be found the statement of its 
discovery in the Works of Bacon, and discussions by the public 
Press. Inquries, objections and answers from so many different 
points of view would seem to cover every phase of the matter. 
Unreasoning prejudice is, of course, beyond reply. To those 
of open mind this exposition of the discovery will be most in- 
teresting. Its importance cannot be overestimated. A new 
literature, buried these three hundred years, as interesting as it 
it surprising, has been unearthed. Its authenticity is placed 
beyond question. 



BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF FRAI^CIS BACON. 
Baconiana. 

To thousands who tread unthinkingly the earth's fair sur- 
face, the mineral constitution of the globe, or the history of its 
formation, is as a sealed book. The geologist, however, 
pointing out the parallel lines in a rock will tell us they indicate 
the glacial period. From a piece of coal he will describe the 
forests and plant life which formed the coal measures of the 
carboniferous era. He finds where volcanic action reveals 
strata from unknown depths, and reads their history like a 
printed page. 

In architecture, the ages stamped, each its own, peculi- 
arities upon column and temple, and the student of that science 
will declare the date of the ruins which accident or excavation 
have brought to view. 

We see a tapering obelisk inscribed with hieroglyphics, and 
say this is Egyptian. The eye educated to discriminate will 
study the writings upon the stone that has been preserved from 
remote ages, and will say, this is the hieroglyphic proper; this 
ideographic ; this the phonetic, or of this or that peculiar 
character, this is the Egyptian Hieratic ; this the Phcenecian ; 
these the Cuniform characters of the ancient Persian or 
Assyrian inscriptions, and few will challenge the correctness 
of the decipherings. 

The savant will tell us that the environment, the nationality 
and personality are unmistakably impressed upon the literature 
of every country, mark the times and character of its people 
and the stage of its progress. Year by year, decade by decade^ 
age by age, time passed and wrought its changes until that 
period was reached in Vv'hich the English people of the present 
day are interested because of the discussion which it has 
aroused — the latter part of the XVIth and beginning of the 
XVHth Centuries. Knighthood had passed its flower but the 
English Court still loved the tales of Knightly deeds and found 



43 



delight in the fancies of the Shepheard's Calender and Faerie 
Queene, Legitimate drama began to develop, replacing 
masques and mysteries. History was written and its lessons 
emphasized by dramatic representations. Essays brought the 
truth "home to men's bosoms and business," and experimental 
science made clear that ''there are more things in heaven and 
earth than are dreamt of in our philosophy." 

This was the age when Francis Bacon lived and wrote, and 
fantasy, and essay, and drama began to appear, at first 
anonymously, and then under names of men as authors, whose 
lives, habits and capabilities presented the most incongruous 
contrasts to the works produced. They were days of peril and 
secret intrigue, when the words from the lips of the Courtier 
were often farthest removed from the thought of the brain, 
and when all secret communications were committed to cipher. 

Of all the weighty secrets of that time, none save the Queen 
of England herself bore any more momentous than that pro- 
lific author. So momentous were they that few traces of their 
import found place upon the public records in connected or 
intelligible form, and were supposed to have died with those 
most intimately connected with them. 

Bacon placed in his De Augmentis Scientiarum the key to a 
simple but most useful Cipher, of his own invention, and we 
now find that through its instrumentality the secrets so 
jealously guarded in his life time, were committed to his works, 
and waited only the hand and vision of a decipherer to be 
revealed to the ages which should follow. 

Because the writer of this article has for seven years worked 
upon the Ciphers of Bacon, not as a dilettante, but as one who 
realized the importance and vastness of the undertaking, urged 
on by the fascination of a great discovery and a growing 
interest in the developments of it, the statements made con- 
cerning the "Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon" are not 
"uninspired guesses," nor mere conjecture, but such as come 
from knowledge gained by the hardest work and closest appli- 
cation, until the eye has been trained to that degree of dis- 
crimination by which, like that of the geologist, it is able to 
make hidden things plain. 

In pursuit of the same objects as other students of things 
Baconian, my own investigations have been in quite a different 
field from theirs, and have met with most successful, as well as 



44 



most surprising results, not less surprising to myself, than they 
will be to my readers. I have been glad to submit the results of 
my years of study for the edification of those interested in the 
same subject, for they supply missing links in the literature 
of that era and explain much, if not all, that has been 
mysterious and difficult of explanation. 

The last two numbers of Baconiana have presented varied 
comments upon the published results of my investigations. 
Naturally opinions differ, according to the point of view. 
Although the things discovered and brought to light are those 
which have been so diligently sought for, and believed to exist 
by the deepest students, yet the wider field unexpectedly dis- 
closed and the marvelousness of it all, prompt to incredulity. 

The objections urged against a belief in the cipher dis- 
closures appear in a variety of forms. The astounding 
revelations are beyond the dreams of the most ardent believers 
that Bacon's sphere of action and achievements were far 
greater than had been acknowledged, and some have gone so 
far as to think the recent publication of the "Bi-literal Cypher" 
must have been a romantic creation of my own, the words made 
to fit the differing forms of the Italic letters in the old books, 
and written out in imitation of the forms of thought and 
manner of speech of the old English language, enriched by the 
vocabulary of the great Francis. To suggest such a thing, 
with all that it implies, would bring its own refutation. 

It is true that the Cipher Story does not in all respects accord, 
or stop with what has been supposed to be the "facts of 
history." Authorities do not agree as to what the "facts" 
were, nor is it believed that all have found place on the records, 
and historians have filled gaps with deductions and conjectures, 
some of which have been most extravagant and impossible. 
Especially does this appear to be true in the light of the cipher 
disclosures, and whatever of variation there may be will 
furnish a profitable field for the investigators, and there is little 
reason to doubt their ultimate harmony. Cyphers would not 
be used to hide known facts, and could be useful only in 
recording those that had been suppressed. 

Some have given expression to the thought that the Cipher 
Story shows a most unpleasant phase of character in Bacon, 
and a lack of that princely spirit which should have actuated 
the son of Elizabeth, entitled to the throne, in not trying to 



45 



fKDSsess himself of royal power at any cost. Essex, of a more 
martial spirit, essayed to seize it, when Francis refused to 
make open claim to being Prince, in the face of the denials of 
the Queen, — and Essex was beheaded for the attempt. The 
murder of two princes of the blood royal by Richard Third; 
the imprisonment and execution of another, by Henry 
Seventh; the juggling with all rights by Henry Eighth, were 
not remote, — quite near enough to chill the blood of the peace- 
loving student and deter him from making himself sufficiently 
obnoxious to invite a similar fate. Later, his own account, 
in the Cipher, of the reasons for not striving to establish him- 
self upon the throne appear quite adequate, — the succession 
established by \a.\v, and quite satisfactory to the people, — "our 
witnesses dead, our certificates destroyed," etc., (pages 33, 38, 
47, 201, and other references). He submitted to the inevitable 
as did Prince Napoleon, and as others have done in our own 
time, — for "what will not a man yield up for his life.'' 

Whether or not Bacon has "told the truth" in the Cipher, 
is not in the province of the decipherer to discuss. A decipherer 
can only disclose what is infolded. As to "slandering the 
Queen" in the statements which the Cipher records. — if so, 
Bacon would not be alone, for the old MSS, and as reliable and 
recent an authority as the National Dictionary of Biography 
admit the motherhood of Elizabeth, though they do not give 
the names of the offspring. This is supplied by the Cipher, 
written by the one person most likely to know. If the Cipher 
exists, and we know that it does, there must be some more 
reasonable theory for its being written into so many pub- 
lished books for more than fifty years, than for the purpose of 
slander or falsification. The peril of its discovery in the early 
days of its infolding would be enhanced by its being a slander, 
and the head would have "stood tickle on the shoulders" of 
anyone guilty of so causeless a crime. 

Francis would have been more "lunatic" for risking such 
matter in cipher if not true, than "coward" for not daring 
openly to proclaim the truth which was being so carefully 
suppressed. 

Many inquiries have reached me, asking "how is the Cipher 
worked," and expressing disappointment that the inquirer had 
been unable to grasp the system or its application. It would 
be difficult to teach Greek or Sanscrit, in a few written lines. 



46 



or to learn it by a few hours study. It is equally so with the 
Cipher. Deciphering the Bi-literal Cipher, as it appears in 
Bacon's works, will be impossible to those who are not pos- 
sessed of an eyesight of the keenest, and perfect accuracy of 
vision in distinguishing minute differences in form, lines, 
angles and curves in the printed letters. Other things 
absolutely essential are unlimited time and patience, per- 
sistency, and aptitude, love for overcoming puzzling difficul- 
ties and, I sometimes think, inspiration. As not every one can 
be a poet, an artist, an astronomer, or adept in other branches 
requiring special aptitude, so, and for the same reasons, not 
every one will be able to master the intricacies of the Cipher, 
for in many ways it is most intricate and puzzling, — not in the 
system itself, but in its use in the books. "It must not be made 
too plain lest it be discovered too quickly nor hid too deep, lest 
it never see the light of day," is the substance of the inventor's 
thought many times repeated in the work. 

The system has been recognized, and used, since the day that 
De Augmentis was published, and has had its place in every 
translation and publication since, but the ages have waited to 
learn that it was embedded in the original books themselves 
from the date of his earliest writings (1579 as now known) 
and infolded his secret personal history. To disbelieve the 
Cipher because not "every one" can decipher it, would be as 
great a mistake as it would be to say that the translations of the 
character writings and hieroglyphics of older times, which have 
been deciphered, were without foundation or significance, 
because we could not ourselves master them in a few hours of 
inefficient trial. I would repeat, Ciphers are used to hide 
things, not to make them plain. 

The different editions of the same work form each a separate 
study and tell a different Cipher Story. The two editions of 
De Augmentis form an illustration. The first, or "London" 
edition, was issued, according to Spedding, in October, 1623. 
The next, or "Paris" edition, was issued in 1624. They differ 
in the Italic printing, and some errors in the second do not 
occur in the first. The 1624 edition has been deciphered; and 
the hidden story appears in the "Bi-literal Cypher" (page 310). 
The 1623 edition has not, as yet, been deciphered. It seems to 
be a rare edition. I found a copy in the British Museum, one in 
the Bodleian library at Oxford, two in Cambridge, and one in 



47 



the choice collection of old books in the library of Sir Edwin 
Burning Lawrence. 

In the course of my work, Marlowe's Edward Second had 
been deciphered before De Augmentis was taken up. At the 
end of Edward Second occurs this "veiled" statement, 
referring to De Augmentis (page 152 Bi-literal Cypher) ". . 
. the story it contains (our twelft king's nativity since 
our sovereign, whose tragedy we relate in this way) shall now 
know the day . ." Had Francis succeeded to the throne, 
he would have been the twelfth king (omitting the queens) 
after Edward Second, hence the inference that De Augmentis 
would contain much of his personal history. My disappoint- 
ment was great when instead of this the hidden matter was 
found to be the Argument of the Odyssey, something not 
anticipated, or wanted, and would never have been the result of 
my own choice or imagination. At the close of the deciphered 
work in Burton's Anatomy, in which the Argument of the Iliad 
was most unexpectedly found — another great disappoint- 
ment — is this "veiled" statement: (page 309) ". . . while 
a Latin work — De Augmentis — will give aid upon the other 
(meaning the Odyssey). As in this work (meaning the Diad) 
favorite parts are enlarged (in blank verse) yet as it lendeth 
ayde . . .," etc., — i. e., sets a pattern for the writing out of 
the Odyssey in the Word Cipher. This explained the 1624 edi- 
tion, and the inference is that the 1623 edition will disclose the 
personal history referred to on page 152. 

In the 1624 edition there are some errors in the illustration 
of the cipher methods and in the Cicero Epistle which do not 
occur in the 1623 edition. The Latin words midway on page 
282, "qui pauci sunt" in the 1623 edition, are "qui parati sunt" 
in the 1624, page 309, — an error referred to on page 10 of the 
Introduction of the "Bi-literal Cypher" as wrong termination, 
there being too many letters for the group, and one letter must 
be omitted. Other variations show errors in making up the 
forms on pages 307 and 308 in the 1624 edition, whether pur- 
posely for confusion or otherwise, it is impossible to tell. The 
line on page 307, 

"Bxemplum Alphabeti Biformis," 
should be placed above the Bi-formed Alphabet on page 308, 
while 

"Bxemplum Accommodationis" 



48 



should be placed above the example of the adaptation just pre- 
ceding. The repetition of twelve letters of the bi-formed alpha- 
bet could hardly be called a printer's error, as they are of 
another form, unlike those on the preceding page, and may be 
taken as an example of the statement that "any two forms will 
do." In these illustrations the letters seem to be drawn with a 
pen and are a mixture of script and peculiar forms, and unlike 
any in the regular fonts of type used in the printed matter. No 
part of the Cipher Story is embodied in the script or pen letters 
on these pages. Whether or not the changing of the lines was 
done purposely, the grouping of the Italic letters from the 
regular fonts is consecutive as the printed lines stand, the 
wrong make-up causing no break in the connected narration. 
There are many "veiled" statements throughout the "Bi-literal 
Cypher," such as are noted in Edward Second and in Burton, 
To the decipherer they have a meaning, indicating what to look 
for and where to find that which is necessary for correct and 
completed work, as well as to guard against errors and incor- 
rect translation. 

My researches among the old books in the British Museum 
the past season have borne rich fruit, for there were found the 
earlier cipher writings. Shepheard's Calendar, which appeared 
anonymously in 1579, contains the first, and discloses the signi- 
fication of the mysterious initials "E. K." and the identity of 
this person with the author of die work. The Cipher narrative 
begins thus : "E. K. will be found to be nothing less than the 
letters signifying the future Sovereign, or England's King. . 
. . In event of death of Her Ma., who bore in honorable 
wedlock, Robert, now known as sonne to Walter Devereaux, 
as well as him who now speaketh to the unknown aidant 
decypherer . . , we, the eldest borne should by Divine 
right of a law of God, and made binding on man, inherit 
scepter and throne. . . . We devised two Cyphers, now 
used for the first time, for this said history, as safe, clear and 
undecipherable, whilst containing the keys in each which open 
the most important. . . . Till a decypherer find a pre- 
pared or readily discovered alphabet, it seemeth to us almost 
impossible, save by Divine gift and heavenly instinct, that he 
should be able to read what is thus revealed." 

Following Shepheard's Calender, the works between 1579 
and 1590, so far deciphered (but as yet unpublished) are: 

49 



Arraignement of Paris, 1584. 

Mirrour of Modestie, 1584. 

Planetomachia, 1585. ; 

Treatise of Melancholy, 1586. Two editions of this were 
issued the same year, with differing Italics, The first ends 
with an incomplete cipher word which is completed in the 
second for the continued narration, thus making evident which 
was first published, unless they were published at the same 
time. 

Euphues, 1587; Morando, 1587. These two also join 
together, with an incomplete word at the end of the first finding 
its completion in the commencement of the Cipher in the second. 

Perimedes the Blacke-smith, 1588; Pandosto, 1588. These 
two also join together. 

Spanish Masquerado, 1589. Two editions of this work bear 
date the same year, but have different Italicising. In one edition 
the Cipher Story is complete, closing with the signature : "Fr. 
Prince." In the other the story is not complete, the book 
ending with an incomplete cipher word, the remainder of which 
will be found in some work of near that date which has not yet 
been indicated and deciphered. 

These, while not all the works in which Cipher will be found 
between the years 1579 and 1590, unmistakably connect the 
earlier writings with those of later date than 1 590 which have 
been deciphered — as published- in the "Bi-literal Cypher" — so 
that we now know that the Cipher writings were being con- 
tinuously infolded in Bacon's works, from the first to the last 
of his literary productions. 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 



50 



THE BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF SIR FRANCIS BACOX. 

A NEW LIGHT ON A FEW OLD BOOKS. 

By Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 

[Mrs. Gallup professes to find in certain of Bacon's works, the first 
folio of Shakespeare, and other books of the period, two distinctive 
founts of italic type employed. All the letters of one fount stand for 
the letter a itt the cipher, those of the other for b. Hence it is pos- 
sible to translate, as it zvere, any given line of type into a scries of 
abbba, abaab, baaba, abaaa. and so on, according to the type employed, 
and thereby, to spell out zvords and sentences in accordance with the 
principles laid down by Bacon himself in his account of the so-called 
"Bi-literal" cypher in his "De Augmentis Scicntiarium." In a further 
article zvhich she is nozv preparing Mrs. Gallup zvill deal zvith a 
number of the individual writers who have taken part in the Bacon- 
Shakespeare controversy during the last few weeks, zvhose criticisms, 
we learn by cablegram, and only nozv before her. This preliminary 
paper will enable our readers to acquaint themselves with the nature 
of Mrs. Gallup' s laborious investigations. — Ed. P. M. M.]. 

Pall Mall Magazine, March, 1902. 

It is a pleasure to respond to the cabled invitation from the 
Pall Mall Magazine to write an article upon the "Bacon- 
Shakespeare Controversy," although I have really never been 
concerned with it, except incidentally. I did not find myself 
a Baconian until the discovery of the Bacon ciphers answered 
the questions in such a final way that controversy should end. 

I think my best plan will be to give a clear, authoritative, 
and somewhat popular exposition of my book, Tlie Bi-literal 
Cypher of Sir Francis Bacon, which was recently very kindly 
and appreciatively reviewed by Mr. Mallock in the Nineteenth 
Century and After. I had not the pleasure of knowing Mr. Mal- 
lock, and his article was wholly a surprise. 

In giving to the world the results of my researches, I have 
felt, as have my publishers, that my work should be left with- 
out attempt upon our part to influence or mould opinion in 
any way other than by setting forth what I have found. 

51 



Some one has said, "any man's opinion is the measure of 
his knowledge." If his knowledge is ample his judgment should 
be true, and I am well aware there has been little opportunity 
for men of letters or the reading public to know about this new 
phase of the old subject. 

The book itself is much wider in its range, and much more 
far-reaching in its literary and historical consequences, than the 
mere settlement of the Bacon-Shakespeare question. It con- 
cerns not only the authorship of much of the best literature 
of the Elizabethan period, but the regularity of successions to 
the throne of England ; and it transfers the "controversy" from 
the realm of literary opinion and criticism to the determina- 
tion of the question whether I have correctly and truthfully 
transcribed a cipher. 

That this will at once meet with universal acceptance is 
not expected. On the face of things it seems improbable — al- 
most as improbable to the world as the revolution of the earth 
about the sun was to Lord Bacon, who declared it could in no- 
wise be accepted. "Galileo built his theory. . .supposing the 
earth revolved. . . . But this he devised upon an assumption 
that cannot be allowed — viz. that the earth ynoves." (Nov. Org.) 

Two limited editions of the book were published, mostly 
for private circulation, while my researches were going on, but 
with little effort to obtain public audience, awaiting the time, 
now arrived, when I could present the first of the cipher writ- 
ings from early editions of works in the British Museum. 

The interest it has excited has been considerable, varying 
in its expression from more or less good-natured doubts as to 
my sanity and veracity, from those who are satisfied with first 
impressions ; to the careful examination by such writers as 
Mr. Mallock and some others who have regarded it as worthy 
of serious consideration. 

For myself, I have been satisfied to wait for the verdict. 
It will be that I have at great cost put before the public a most 
detailed and elaborate hoax — or worse; or that Francis Bacon 
was a cipher writer and the most extraordinary personage in 
literature the world has yet known. 

Assuming for the moment the cipher as a fact, what are 
the claims made in it for himself? Briefly, but startlingly 
stated, they are: That he was the author of the works attribu- 

52 



ted to Edmund Spenser, and those of Greene, Peele, Marlowe, 
and Shakespeare, a portion of those published by Ben Jonson, 
also the Anatomy of Melancholy known as Burton's, besides the 
works to which Bacon's name is attached ; that these, instead 
of being in fact the outpourings of literary inspiration, are lit- 
erary mosaics, the repository of other literature — much of it 
then dangerous to Bacon to expose — made consecutive by trans- 
position, and gaining in literary interest by the new relations. 
The bi-literal cipher gives the rules by which the constituent 
parts of these mosaics are to be reassembled in their original 
form by the 'Svord-cipher," so called, a second system permeat- 
ing the same works and hiding a larger and more varied liter- 
ature than the first. It is also asserted that Bacon was the true 
heir to the throne of England, through a secret marriage be- 
tween the Earl of Leicester and Elizabeth, which took place 
prior to her accession, while both were confined in the Tower 
of London ; that for obvious reasons of state the marriage could 
not be announced before the coronation, and that the Queen 
afterwards refused to acknowledge it publicly ; that the unfor- 
tunate Essex was in fact his younger brother, and the other- 
wise inexplicable rebellion was undertaken by Essex to compel 
from the Queen recognition of his descent, with expectation 
of the throne if denied to, or not claimed by, Francis. 

The personal matter, scattered in the bi-literal cipher 
through the numerous volumes, is repeated in different forms 
many times — evidently in the hope that the claims asserted to 
the throne and the events of his life would be detected and de- 
ciphered, from some, if not from all his works, at some future 
time. 

The book itself contains about 385 pages of deciphered 
matter, written in the old English of the Elizabethan period, 
and relating to men and things, literary and historical, then 
existing. It affords the most ample and serious materials for 
what may be called "the higher criticism" ; and such criticism 
is very cordially invited, for reasons more important than any- 
thing concerning my own abilities or personality. The most 
sceptical will admit industry, and some sort of capability, in 
producing a work of the kind. It is due to the public that in 
a presentation of this kind I should offer a prima-facie case. 

The question most nearly related to the Bacon-Shakespeare 



53 



controversy, from a literary standpoint, is: Was Bacon's imag- 
ination, fancy and ability, equal to the production of such poet- 
ic and dramatic literature as is embraced in the Shakespeare 
plays and other works named ? The dicta obtainable from mere 
comparisons of style are scarcely final. Individual judgments, 
in this field, are far from conclusive or satisfactory. There is 
as much difference in style between the laboured, interminable 
sentences of Bacon's philosophical works and the polished sen- 
tences of the Essays as there is between the Essays and the 
epigrams of the Plays. 

Bacon has been somewhat out of fashion of late. His phil- 
osophy, once strong and new, has been developed into the daily 
practice of these forceful and effective times, and is now inter- 
esting principally to the curious. His life, — reduced by Pope 
to the inconclusive epigram, "the wisest, brightest, and meanest 
of mankind," — ending in his disgrace, does not now attract the 
average reader, while the compactness of the Essays deters many 
from a second reading. It is well, therefore, to refresh our 
minds concerning the man, and the estimation in which he was 
held before the present-day rush for new things had become so 
absorbing. 

Briefly, the well-considered opinions of those best fitted 
to judge are, that his abilities were transcendent in every field. 
Lord Macaulay tells us that Bacon's mind was "the most ex- 
quisitely constructed intellect that has ever been bestowed upon 
any of the children of men" ; Pope, that "Lord Bacon was the 
greatest genius that England, or perhaps any other country, 
ever produced" ; Sir Alexander Grant, that "it is as an inspired 
seer, the prose-poet of modern science, that I reverence Bacon" ; 
Alexander Smith, that "he seems to have written his Essays 
with the pen of Shakespeare." Mackintosh calls his literature 
"the utmost splendour of imagery." Addison says, that "he 
possessed at once all those extraordinary talents which were di- 
vided among the greatest authors of antiquity. . . one does not 
know which to admire most in his writings, the strength of rea- 
son, force of style, or brightness of imagination."' Mr. Welch 
assures us : "Lord Bacon was a poet. His language has a sweet 
and majestic rhythm which satisfies the sense, no less than the 
superhuman wisdom of his philosophy satisfies the intellect." 
While H. A. Taine, a Frenchman, recognising throughout the 

54 



differences of language the force of the poetic thought, gives 
us this in his English Literature : — 

"In this band of scholars, dreamers, and inquirers, appears 
the most comprehensive, sensible, originative of the minds 
of the age — Francis Bacon, a great and luminous intellect, 
one of the finest of this poetic progeny. . . .There is nothing 
in English prose superior to his diction. . . . His thought is in 
the manner of artists and poets, and he speaks after the man- 
ner of prophets and seers. . .Shakespeare and the seers do not 
contain more vigorous or expressive condensations of thought, 
more resembling inspiration. . . . His process is that of the crea- 
tors: it is inspiration, not reasoning." 

Again, Lord Macaulay tells us: "No man ever had an 
imagination at once so strong and so thoroughly subjugated. 
In truth, much of Bacon's life was spent in a visionary world, 
amidst things as strange as any that are described in the Ara- 
bian tales." — "A man so rare in knowledge of so many several 
kinds, endued with the facility and felicity of expressing it all 
in so elegant, significant, so abimdant, and yet so choice and 
ravishing array of words, of metaphors and allusions, as per- 
haps the world has not seen since it was a world," said Sir Tobie 
Mathew. 

The German Schlegel, in his History of Literature, calls 
him "this mighty genius," and adds, "Stimulated by his ca- 
pacious and stirring intellect . . . intellectual culture, nay, the 
social organisation of modern Europe generally, assumed a new 
shape and complexion." While again from Lord Macaulay we 
quote this : "With great minuteness of observation he had an 
amplitude of comprehension such as has never yet been vouch- 
safed to any human being." 

In the Encyclopoedia Britannica we read : "The thoughts 
are weighty, and, even when not original, have acquired a pe- 
culiar and unique tone or cast by passing through the crucible 
of Bacon's mind. A sentence from the Essays can rarely be 
mistaken for the production of any other writer. The short, 
pithy sayings. 

Jewels five words long 
That on the stretched forefinger of all Time 
Sparkle for ever, 

55 



have become popular mottoes and household words. The style 
is quaint, original, abounding in allusions and witticisms, and 
rich, even to gorgeousness, with piled-up analogies and meta- 
phors." 

In the presence of these acknowledged masters in literary 
judgment, I may well be silent. These quotations might be 
extended indefinitely. Anything I could add of my own would 
be repetition. In the face of these well-considered opinions, the 
flippant adverse judgment of newspaper critics, in the Bacon- 
Shakespeare controversy, thrown off in the hurry of daily is- 
sues, may for the present be disregarded. The writers of such 
articles have never read Bacon well, if at all, — perhaps not 
Shakespeare thorouglily. 

My work in the past eight years of constant study of the 
subject has led me, of necessity, through every line and word 
that Bacon wrote, both acknowledged and concealed, so far as the 
latter has been developed. The work I have done upon the 
word-cipher in reassembling his literature from the mosaic to 
its original form has given me a critical knowledge at least, and 
a basis perhaps possessed by few for forming, to the extent of 
my abilities, a critical judgment; but I would merely add, that 
he was, assuredly, master in many fields of which even they 
who knew him best were unaware. 

Granting him these literary powers, was he at the same 
time a cipher writer ? and did he particularly affect this bi-liter- 
al method of cipher writing? 

For the first I refer, for brevity's sake, to the article on 
cryptograms in the Encyclopoedia Britannica ; and for the 
second to the original Latin De Augmentis Scientiarum (edi- 
tions of 1623 and 1624), and its very excellent translation by 
Messrs. Spedding, Ellis, and Heath, where the bi-literal cipher 
precisely as I have used it is described and illustrated by Bacon 
in full, with the statement that he invented it while at the Court 
of France. This was between his sixteenth and eighteenth 
years. His first reference to it was in 1605. Its first publica- 
tion was in 1623, after he had used it continuously forty-four 
years, confiding to it his wrongs and woes, and intending, in 
thus explaining and giving the key, that at some near or distant 
day his sorrows and his claims should be known by its decipher- 
ment. 



56 



The cipher, described by Bacon in De Augmentis Scientiar- 
uni, is simplicity itself, being in principle mere combinations 
and alternations of any two unlike things, and in practice as 
used by him consisting of alternations of letters from two slight- 
ly different founts of Italic type, arranged in groups of five. 
This affords thirty-two possible combinations, being eight in 
excess of the twenty-four letters of the alphabet he used. The 
free use of these Italics is a notable feature in all his literature, 
and has been the cause of much speculation. Sometimes the 
differences between the letters of the two founts are bold and 
marked, often delicate and very difficult for the novice to dis- 
tinguish, but possible of determination by the practised eye. The 
differences, especially in the capitals used in the 1623 Folio of 
the Shakespeare Plays, are apparent to the dullest vision, and 
photographic copies of it are in nearly every public and many 
private libraries, and so accessible to all. 

In making up his alphabet the two founts are called by him 
the 'a fount' and the 'h fount,' and the several groups of five, 
representing each letter of the alphabet he used in the cipher, 
are as follows : aaaaa, a ; aaadb, b ; aaaba, c ; etc., etc. 

After the full exposition of this cipher by Mr. Mallock, a 
repetition here would seem superfluous, and I will only take 
space to say that the detailed explanation is to be found in De 
Augmentis Scientiarum in every edition of Bacon's complete 
works. 

One of the interesting incidents of the use of this bi-literal 
method is, that it did not at all require taking the printer into 
the writer's confidence. A peculiar mark under the letter would 
indicate the fount from which the letter was to be taken. The 
printer may have thought Bacon insane, or what not, but the 
marking gave him no clue to the cipher. 

Perhaps I cannot better illustrate the scope of the research- 
es that have brought out such strange and unexpected disclo- 
sures than by giving the bibliography of my work. This will 
have an attraction for many, who will sympathise with me in 
the pleasure I have known in working in these rare and costly 
old books. 

The deciphering has been from the following original edi- 
tions in my possession: 



57 



The Advancement of Learning 1605 

The Shepheards' Calender 1611 

The Faerie Queene 1613 

Novum Organum 1620 

Parasceve 1620 

The History of Henry VII 1622 

Edward Second 1622 

The Anatomy of Melancholy 1628* 

The New Atlantis 1635* 

Sylva Syl varum 1635* 

and also a beautifully bound full folio facsimile of the 1623 
edition of the Shakespeare plays, bearing the name of Coleridge 
on the title page. 

In the Boston Library I obtained: 

Richard Second 1598 

David and Bethsabe 1599 

Midsummer Night's Dream 1600 

Much Ado About Nothing 1600 

Sir John Oldcastle 1600 

Merchant of Venice 1600 

Richard, Duke of York 1600 

Treasons of Essex 1601 

King Lear 1608 

Henry Fifth 1608 

Pericles 1609 

Hamlet 1611 

Titus Andronicus 1611 

Richard Second 1615 

Merry Wives of Windsor 1619 

Whole Contention of York, etc 1619 

Pericles 1619 

Yorkshire Tragedy 1619 

Romeo and Juliet (without date) 



From the choice library of John Dane, M.D., Boston : 

The Treasons of Essex 1601 

Vitae et Mortis 1623 



From the library of Marshall C. Lefferts, of New York, 
I had: 

Ben Jonson's Plays, Folio 1616 

A Quip for an Upstart Courtier 1620 



* These three bear dates after Bacon's death, and were undoubt- 
edly completed by Dr. Rawley, his secretary, whose explanation 
regarding them is foimd on pages 339-340 of the Bi-literal 'Cypher. , 

58 



From the Lenox Library, K^ew York: 



Midsummer Night's Dream 1600 

Sir John Oldcastle 1600 

London Prodigal 1605 

Pericles 1619 

Yorkshire Tragedy 1619 

The Whole Contention, etc. 1619 

Shakespeare, first folio 1623 



and from Mrs. Pott, of London, England: 

Ben Jonson's Plays 1616 

De Augmentis Scientiarum 1624 

During the five months spent at the British Museum : 

The Shepheards' Calender 1579 

Araygnement of Paris 1584 

Mirrour of Modestie 1584 

Planetomachia 1585 

A Treatise of Melancholy 1586 

A Treatise of Mel. (2nd. Ed.) 1586 

Euphues 1587 

Morando 1587 

Perimedes 1588 

Spanish Masquerade 1589 

Pandosto 1588 

Spanish Masq. (2nd Ed.) 1589 

In the library of Sir Edwin Durning-Lawrence I was able 
to decipher, from the Treatise of Melanclioly, some pages that 
were missing from the copy at the British Museum. 

I wish here to express my deep obligation to the manage- 
ment of the British Museum, and to those numerous friends I 
was so fortunate as to make while in London, for their uniform 
kindness to me — a stranger among them — and for the facilities 
which they, to the extent of their power, never failed to afford 
me in my work. 

Every Italic letter in all the books named has been exam- 
ined, studied, classified, and set down ''in groups of five" and 
the results transcribed. Each book deciphered has its own pe- 
culiarities and forms of type, and must be made a separate 
study. 

The 1023 Folio has the largest variety of letters and ir- 
regularities ; but the most difficult work was Bacon's History of 

59 



Henry the Seventh, the mysteries of which it took me the great- 
er part of three months of ahnost constant study to master. The 
reason came to light as the work progressed, and will appear 
from the reading of the first page of the deciphered matter, 
with its explanations of '"sudden shifts" to puzzle would-be de- 
cipherers. 

In the deciphering of the different works mentioned, sur- 
prise followed surprise as the hidden messages were disclosed^ 
and disappointment as well was not infrequently encountered. 
Some of the disclosures are of a nature repugnant, in many re- 
spects, to my very soul, as they were to all my preconceived 
convictions, and they would never have seen the light, except 
as a correct transcription of what the cipher revealed. As a de- 
cipherer I had no choice, and I am in no way responsible for 
the disclosures, except as to the correctness of the transcription. 

Bacon, throughout the Bi-literal Cypher, makes frequent 
mention of his translations of Homer, which he considered one 
of his "great works and worthy of preservation," and which 
had been scattered through the mosaic of his other writings. 
One of the strongest of his expressed desires was that it should 
be gathered and reconstructed in its original form. 

Perhaps the greatest surprise that came to me in all my 
work relates to what was found in the Anatomy of Melancholy. 
Several other of the works had been finished before this book 
was taken up. After a few pages had been decipjiered, relating 
to points in Bacon's history, to my great disappointment the 
cipher suddenly changed the subject of its disclosures to this : 

"As hath been said, much of th' materiall of th' Iliad may 
be found here, as well as Homer his second wondrous storie, 
telling of Odysseus his worthy adventures. Th' first nam'd is 
of greater worth, beautie and interesse, alone, in my estimation, 
than all my other work together, for it is th' crowning triumph 
of Homer's pen; and he outstrips all th' others in th' race, as 
though his wits had beene Atalanta's heeles. Next we see Vir- 
gin, and close behind them, striving to attaine unto th' hights 
which they mounted, do I presse on to th' lofty goale. In th' 
plays lately publisht, I have approacht my modell closelie, and 
yet it doth ever seem beyond my attainment. 

"Here are the diverse bookes, their arguments and sundry 
examples of th' lines, in our bi-literal cipher." 

60 



These "arguments/' or outlines, are intended as a frame- 
work about which, with the aid of the keys given, the fuller 
deciphering from the printed lines is to take form through the 
methods of the Word-Cipher, 

The presence of lines, identical — or nearly so — with those 
of Homer, have been noted by close students in all the works 
now named as belonging to Bacon, and it has needed but to 
bring the lines together from their scattered positions, transpose 
names and arrange the parts in proper sequence, to form the 
connected narrative. 

I can best illustrate this — and it will be of interest to those 
fond of the classics — ^by adding a few of the lines from some 
of my unfinished and unpublished work, before I had discovered 
the bi-literal cipher in the typography of the books I was 
using. I will say regarding this part of my incomplete work, 
that a very considerable portion of the material for the first 
four books of the fuller translation of the Iliad had been collect- 
ed and arranged in sequence by the word-cipher before the 
work was laid aside, four years ago, on account of the discov- 
ery of the bi-literal, the development of which, it became at 
once apparent, was of first importance. These directions re- 
garding it occur in the Bi-literal Cypher : 

"Keepe lines, though somewhat be added to Homer ; in 

fact, it might be more truly Homeric to consider it a poeme of 

the times, rather than a historic of true events." (p. 168.) 

"... In all places, be heedfull of the meaning, but do not 

consider the order of the words in the sentences. I should join 

my examples and rules together, you will say. So I will. In 

the 'Faerie Queene,' booke one, canto two, second and third 

lines of the seventh stanzo, thus speaking of Aurora, write : 

Wearie of aged Tithones saffron bed, 

Had spreade, through dewy ayre her purple robe. 

"Or in the eleventh canto, booke two, five-and-thirtieth 

stanzo, arrange the matter thus, to relate in verse the great 

attacke at the ships, at that pointe of time at which the great 

Trojan took up a weighty missile, the gods giving strength to 

the hero's arme : it begins in the sixth verse : 

There lay thereby an huge greate stone, which stood 

Upon one end, and had not many a day 

Removed beene — a signe of sundrie wayes — 

This Hector snatch'd and with exceeding sway." (p. 169.) 

61 



Illustrative of the arguinent, the incident in Book I.^ 
where the priest (liryses "was evilly dismissed by Agamemnon," 
the bi-literal epitome reads: 

"And th' Priest, in silence, walk'd along th' shore of the 
resounding sea. After awhile with many a prayer and teare th' 
old man cried aloud unto Apollo, and his voice was heard." 

In the fuller translation by means of the word-cipher, the 
lines collected from the different books result in the following 
rendering of the passage: 

"The wretched man, at his imperious speech, 
Was all abashed, and there he sudden stay'd. 
While in his eyes stood tears of bitterness. 
The resounding of the sea upon the shore 
Beats with an echo to the unseen grief 
That swells with silence in the tortur'd soul. 
Apart upon his knees that aged sire 
Pray'd much unto Latona's lordly son: 

"Hear, hear, O hear, god of the silver bow! 
Who'rt wont Chrysa and Cilia to protect. 
And reignest in this island Tenedos, 
If ever I did honour thee aright, 
Thy graceful temple aiding to adorn. 
Or if, moreover, I at any time 
Have burn'd to thee fat thighs of bulls and goats. 
Do one thing for me that I shall entreat — 

Phoebus, with thy shafts avenge these tears." 

A little farther on, after Achilles had "summon'd a coun- 
cill" and charged Calchas to declare the cause of the pestilence, 
Bacon's lines — that he warns the decipherer to retain, "though 
somewhat be added to Homer" — gives the altercation thus : 

To whom Atrides did this answer frame: 
"Full true thou speak'st and like thyself, yet, though 
Thou speakest truth, methinks thou speak'st not well. 
It is because no one should sway but he 
He's angry with the gods that any man 
Goeth before him ; he would be above the clouds, 
His fortune's master and the king of men, 
And here is none, methinks, disposed to yield: 
For though the gods do chance him to appoint 
To be a warriour and command a camp. 
Inserting courage in his noble heart, 
Do they give right to utter insults here?" 

There interrupting him, noble Achilles 
Answer'd the king in few words: "Ay forsooth! 

1 should be thought a coward, Agamemnon, 
A man of no estimation in the world, 

If what you will I humbly yield unto, 

62 



And when you say, 'Do this,' it is perform'd. 

I, for my part — let others as they list, — 

I will not thus be fac'd and overpeer'd. 

Do not think so, you shall not find it so: 

Some other seek that may with patience strive 

With thee, Atrides; thou shalt rule no more 

O'er me." 

The transalation by George Chapman, Book I., page 20, 
line 11, reads: 

"All this, good father," said the king, " is comely and good right; 

But this man breaks all such bounds; he affects, past all men, height; 

All would in his power hold, all make his subjects, give to all 

His hot will for their temperate law: all which he never shall 

Persuade at my hands. If the gods have given him the great style 

Of ablest soldier, made they that his license to revile 

Men with vile language?" Thetis' son prevented him, and said: 

"Fearful and vile I might be thought, if the exactions laid 

By all means on me I should bear. Others command to this, 

Thou Shalt not me; or if thou dost, far my free spirit is 

From serving thy command." 

The translation by William Cullen Bryant, book 1, page 
13, line 22, reads: 

To him the sovereign Agamemnon said: 
"The things which thou hast uttered, aged chief. 
Are fitly spoken; but this man would stand 
Above all others; he aspires to be 
The niaster, over all to domineer, 
. And to direct in all things; yet, I think 
There may be one who will not suffer this, 
For if by favor of the immortal gods. 
He was made brave, have they for such a cause 
Given him the liberty of insolent speech?" 

Hereat the great Achilles, breaking in. 

Answered: "Yea, well might I deserve the name 

Of coward and of wretch, should I submit 

In all things to do thy bidding. Such commands 

Lay thou on others, not on me; nor think 

I shall obey thee longer." 

The translation by William Sotheby, M. R. S. L., book 1, 
page 16, line 21, runs as follows: 

"Wise is thy counsel" — Atreus' son reply'd — 
"Well thy persuasive voice might Grecia guide. 

But this — this man must stretch o'er all his sway. 

All must observe his will, his beck obey, 

All hang on him — such, such o'erweening pride, ' 

Rage as he may, by me shall be defy'd. 

The gods, who to his arm its prowess gave. 

Loose they his scornful tongue at will to rave?" 

63 



Him interrupting, fierce Pelides said: 
"Be on my willing brow dishonor laid, 
If I — whate'er thy wish — whate'er thy will, 
Imperious tyrant! — thy command fulfil. 
O'er others rule; by others be obeyed; 
No more Achilles deigns the Atridae aid." 

The Earl of Derby's translation, book 1, page 16, line 12, 
reads : 

To whom the monarch, Agamemnon, thus: 
"Oh, father, full of wisdom are thy words; 

But this proud chief o'er all would domineer; 

O'er all he seeks to rule, o'er all to reign, 

To all dictate, which I will not bear. 

Grant that the gods have giv'n him warlike might; 

Gave they unbridled license to his tongue?" 
To whom Achilles, interrupting thus: 
"Coward and slave I might indeed be deemed, 

Could I submit to make thy word my law; 

To others thy commands; seek not to me 

To dicate, for I follow thee no more." 

It is true that the presence of the bi-literal cipher in any 
work does not prove authorship, being merely a matter of 
typography which can be incorporated in any printed page, 
as it was in fact in Ben Jonson's writings, for Bacon's pur- 
poses. But when it is worked out, and its chief purpose is 
found to be to teach the word-cipher, and that the latter pro- 
duces practicable results such as given above, the confirmation 
of both ciphers is unmistakable. On the other hand, the word- 
cipher is a complete demonstration of the fact that the author 
of the interior work was the author of the exterior. 

I am not infrequently asked, and it is a very natural ques- 
tion, why should Bacon put translations of the Iliad and Odys- 
sey in his works, when neither required secrecy ? I quote a 
sentence from the Bi-literal Cypher (p. 341), deciphered from 
Natural History : 

"Finding that one important story within manie others 
produc'd a most ordinarie play, poem, history, essay, law-max- 
ime, or other kind, class, or description of work, I tried th' ex- 
periment of placing my tra'slations of Homer and Virgil within 
my other Cypher. When one work has been so incorporated 
into others, these are then in like manner treated, separated 
into parts and widely scatter'd into my numerous books." 

64 



In this connection I will add another extract from Ad- 
vancement of Learning (original edition, 1605, p. 52) : 

'And Cicero himselfe, being broken unto it by great ex- 
perience, delivereth it plainely: That whatsoever a man shall 
have occasion'to speake of (if hee will take the paines), he may 
have it in effect premeditate, and handled in these. So that when 
hee commeth to a particular, he shall have nothing to doe, but 
to put too ISTames, and times, and places; and such other Cir- 
cumstances of Individuals." 

In other words. Bacon first constructed, then reconstructed 
from the first writing, such portions as would fit the "names 
and times and places, and such other Circumstances of Individ- 
uals," about which he wished to build a new structure of 
history, drama, or essay. The first literary mosaic, containing 
dangerous matter, as well as much that was not, was transposed 
— the relative position of its component parts changed — to form 
the one we have known. The decipherer's work is to restore 
the fragments to their original form. 

As intimated at the beginning, the value of anything I 
could say upon the Bacon-Shakespeare controversy resolves 
itself into a question of fact — Have I found a cipher, and has 
it been corectly applied ? 

I repeat, the question is out of the realm of literary com- 
parisons altogether. Literary probabilities or improbabilities 
have no longer any bearing, and their discussion has become 
purely agitations of the air: the sole question is — What are 
the facts ? These cannot be determined by slight or imperfect 
examinations, preconceived ideas, abstract contemplation, or 
vigour of denunciation. 

During a somewhat lengthy literary life, I have come to 
perceive the sharp distinction between convictions on any 
subject and the possession of knowledge. I know it is no light 
thing to say to those who love the literature ascribed to Shake- 
speare, "You have worshiped a true divinity at the wrong 
shrine," and the iconoclast should come with knowledge be- 
fore he assails a faith. 

The limits of this article will not permit me to do more in 
the way of illustration ; but I beg to assure the English public 
that I speak from knowledge obtained at a cost of time, money, 

65 



and injury to eye-sight and health greater than I should care 
to mention. 

I am satisfied that my work will not be disregarded ; but 
instead, given a respectful, kindly and intelligent examination 
in Great Britain, the home of Shakespeare and Bacon. 

I say nothing at this time of the validity of all the claims 
Bacon has made; but if they are accepted there will presently 
be accorded to one of the line of English kings the royal title 
of "the greatest literary genius of all time." 



66 



BOOK REVIEWS 



BACON-SHAKESPEARE. 

Mrs. Elizabeth Wells Gallup Throws New Light Upon the 
Mystifying Question — The Bi-Literal Cipher. 

Detroit Free Press. 

It is always difficult to make headway against a well-estab- 
lished tradition. Hence argument going to prove that Shake- 
speare did not write the dramas that have come down to us in 
his name, is discredited largely because we have so long ac- 
cepted his authorship as a matter of fact. But the literature of 
the anti-Shakespeareans is increasing, and the time is past when 
a contemptuous ejaculation or a shrug of the shoulders can dis- 
pose of the evidence they have so carefully and patiently con- 
structed. In truth, the opponents of Shakespeare have been met 
so often by this sort of rebuttal that they are becoming stronger 
and more numerous every year. 

That Shakespeare's plays were not written by the William 
Shaksper of Stratford, was probably first suggested by the dis- 
crepancy between the plays and what we know of the man. 
That Francis Bacon, the great scholar, profound thinker and 
literary genius of the Elizabethan era might be their author was 
first suggested by similarity of philosophy and sentiment, and 
parallelisms of thought and expression. 

That Bacon's was the greatest mind of his age is incontro- 
vertible. Pope calls him ''the greatest genius that England, or 
perhaps any other country, ever produced." Lord Macaulay 
says: "Bacon's mind was the most exquisitely constructed in- 
tellect that has ever been bestowed upon any of the children of 
men ;" while Edmund Burke is even more eulogistic : "Who is 
there that, hearing the name of Bacon, does not instantly recog- 
nize everything; of genius, the most profound; of literature, 
the most extensive ; of discovery, the most penetrating ; of ob- 
servation of human life, the most distinguishing and refined." 

If we can accept Mrs. Elizabeth Wells Gallup's new book, 
"The Bi-Literal Cipher of Francis Bacon," as a genuine dis- 
covery and the story it tells for what it purports to be — Bacon's 
own — the Bacon-Shakespeare controversy is forever at rest. 
There can be no further doubt that Bacon wrote not only the 
plays ascribed to Shakespeare, but also the works appearing 

69 



under the names of Spenser and Peele, Greene and Marlowe, and 
Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy. Mrs. Gallup's discovery of 
a cipher running through them all explains the remarkable sim- 
ilarities that have perplexed critics by demonstrating beyond a 
shadow of doubt — if we accept it at all — that Bacon's genius 
originated them all. 

Some inquiries naturally suggest themselves. The first and 
most natural question is. Was Bacon a writer of ciphers? The 
business of statesmanship required skill in ciphers in his day, 
and little important court and diplomatic business was carried 
on except under such cover. Bacon's earliest public experience 
was with Sir Amyas Paulet for three years in the court of 
France, and his was one of the brightest intellects of his time. 

The next question is, Did he possess the cipher here used? 
This must be answered in the affirmative, for it is found fully 
explained and its uses pointed out in his Latin work, "De Aug- 
mentis," the original of which, published in 1624, has been sub- 
mitted to the writer for examination. It is found also trans- 
lated in full in the standard Spedding, Ellis & Heath edition of 
Bacon's works, found in every library. 

A third question is. What is the nature and method of the 
cipher ? We cannot do better than quote directly from Bacon's 
"Advancement of Learning," copied from this volume : 

"For by this art a way is opened whereby a man may ex- 
press and signify the intentions of his mind at any distance of 
place, by objects which may be presented to the eye and accom- 
modated to the ear, provided those objects be capable of a two- 
fold difference only — as by bells, by trumpets, by lights and 
torches, by the reports of muskets, and any instruments of a 
like nature. 

"But to pursue our enterprise, when you address yourself 
to write resolve your inward infolded letter into this Bi-liter- 
arie alphabet, * * * together with this you must have 
a bi-formed alphabet, as well capital letters as the smaller char- 
acters, in a double form, as fits every man's occasion." 

Bacon calls this the "omnia per omnia," the all in all cipher, 
and speaks of it as an invention of his own made while at the 
Court of France, when he was but 16 or 18 years of age. 

This cipher and its obvious adaptations, it is stated, is the 
basis of nearly every alphabetical cipher code in present gen- 
eral use — the alternating dot and dash of the Morse telegraph 
code, the long and short exposure of light in the heliographic 
telegraph and the "wig-wag" signals of flags or lights in the 
armies and navies of the world. 

70 



As used by Bacon, two slightly differing fonts of Italic 
type were employed, one font representing the letter a, the other 
the letter b. These were alternated in groups of five in his liter- 
ature, each group of five letters representing one letter of the 
alphabet in the secret work. The full alphabet and several illus- 
trations of the working of the cipher in the original works are 
given; in fact, every possible aid to the student and investi- 
gator who wishes to verify for himself the existence of the 
cipher and the mode of its deciphering is freely offered in the 
introduction, prefaces and fac-similes in Mrs. Gallup's work. 

Assuming that the cipher is Bacon's and that it has been 
accurately transcribed, the story told the world in it is beyond 
the dreams of romance; it is simply astounding. 

The cipher story asserts that Bacon was the grandson of 
Henry VIIL, the son of Queen Elizabeth and rightful heir to 
the throne of England. That while imprisoned in the Tower of 
London, where Lord Leicester was also confined, Elizabeth, 
before becoming queen, was secretly married to Leicester, The 
issue of the marriage was two sons, the so-called Francis Bacon 
— whose life was, there is little reason to doubt, preserved 
through the womanly pity and compassion of Mistress Anne 
Bacon — and Robert Devereaux, afterward Earl of Essex. The 
political exigencies of the time did not admit the public 
acknowledgment of the marriage. Francis was raised as the 
son of Nicholas and Anne Bacon, and Elizabeth crowned as the 
Virgin Queen. It pleased her to continue the deceit and Francis 
remained ignorant of his descent until about sixteen years of 
age, when Elizabeth, in one of her historic rages, revealed the 
truth to him and banished him to France. 

Thenceforward Bacon's life was one long disappointed 
hope, which found expression in the secrecy of the cipher. This 
he interwove in every original edition of his works, hoping, 
and intending, that in the long future the cipher would be read, 
and he be justified in the opinion of mankind. If his cipher 
was discovered too soon, his life would pay the forfeit, if never, 
his labor would be in vain. In 1623, when 62 years of age 
and near his death, he published the key to the cipher in "De 
Augmentis" in the hope that it would lead to the unraveling. 
If this volume is correct, it took 300 years of time and a bright 
American woman to separate the web and woof. 

If this story seems incredible, the literary claim is still more 
so. The literary and philosophical works of Bacon are suf- 
ficiently wonderful, without more. All reviewers and biogra- 
phers regard him as possessing one of the most wonderful in- 

71 



tellects in the world's history. These opinions were based 
upon his known works. We are now asked to believe that not 
only these, but the works ascribed to Shakespeare, Spenser, 
Marlowe, Greene, Peele, Burton, and part of Ben Jonson's were 
written by him, and that in each and every one of them this bi- 
literal cipher was placed, to the end that his rights and claims, 
wrongs and sufiferings could become known, at some time, to 
the world. 

Not the least of these marvels is that the "Anatomy of Mel- 
ancholy" of Robert Burton is found to have been published 
under the name of T. Bright, when Burton was lo years of age. 
A later edition is now found to contain, in the bi-literal cipher, 
the Argument of the Iliad, with portions freely translated into 
blank verse, differing in form from any translation heretofore 
made and remarkable for elegance of style and diction. Take 
for example a passage describing the outbreak between the 
Greeks and Trojans, incited by Minerva by the order of Jove, 
at the solicitation of Juno : 

"As in the ocean wide, 
A driving wind from the northwest comes forth 
With force resistless, and the swelling waves 
Succeed so fast that scarce an eye may see 
Where one in pain doth bring another forth, 
Till, on the rockie shore resounding loud 
They spit forth foam white as the mountain snows, 
And break themselves upon the o'er-jutting rocks — 
Thus mightily, the Grecian phalanxes 
Incessantly mov'd onward to th' battaile. 
It might not then be said that anie man 
Possessed power of human speech or thought, 
So silentlie did they their leaders follow 
In reverentiall awe. Each chief commanded 
The troops that came with him — each led his owne — 
Glitt'ring in arms, bright shining as the sunne, 
While in well ordered phalanxes they mov'd. 

"The Trojan hosts were like unto a flock 
Close in a penne folded at fall of night, 
That bleating looked th' waye their young ones went 
And filled th' avre with dire confusion — 
Such was the noyse among the Trojan hosts. 
No two gave utterance to the same crye, 
So various were the nations and the countries 
From whence they came. * * * 

"Like wintry mountain torrent roaring loud 
That frightes th' shepheard in th' deepe ravine 
Mixing the floods tumultuously that poure 
From forth an hundred gushing springs at once, 
Thus did the deaf'ning battaile din arise, 
When meeting in one place with direful force 
In tumult and alarums th' armies joyned. 
Then might of warriour met an equall might ; 

72 



Shields clasht on shields, the brazen spear on spear 
While dying groans mixt with the battaile cry 
In awesome sound ; and steedes were fetlock deepe 
In blood, fast flowing as the armies met." 

Still another chapter in the romance of Bacon's life is dis- 
closed in the cipher. Because of a late and somewhat mercen- 
ary marriage, he has been considered as having a cold nature, 
a conclusion hightened by the loveless comments of his Essay 
on Love. But the cipher writing discloses an early disappoint- 
ment as the cause. While in France, and 17, he was violently 
enamored of the beautiful but dissolute Marguerite, wife of 
Henry of Navarre, and his senior by something like eight years. 
A divorce from Henry and her union with Bacon, the rightful 
Prince of Wales, was actually planned. Tlie fair Marguerite 
proved fickle also, but his writings are filled with references to 
his affection for her which her falseness could not, apparently, 
extinguish. He tells us himself that "Romeo and Juliet" was 
written to picture their love, saying: "The joy of life ebb'd 
from our hearts with our parting, and it never came againe into 
this bosom in full flood-tide." Another interesting episode 
brought out is Bacon's account of his brother's treason and his 
self-justification and remorse at his own part in the punishment 
that was meted out to him. 

The verity of the cipher Mrs. Gallup has so painstakingly 
and with such unwearied patience unfolded would seem to be 
sustained by the fact that it is Bacon's own invention, fully — 
even elaborately — set forth in one of his later writings, when, 
Elizabeth being dead and he himself near his end, he had less 
fear of consequences should his secret be discovered — indeed, 
he came to fear it would not be discovered and that he would 
not be justified to posterity. 

So much of reserve as is due to lack of personal demonstra- 
tion is maintained by tne writer, but here are 360 pages of 
deciphered matter, with sufficient means of proof to satisfy any 
investigator. There can be no middle ground ; one must accept 
or deny it in toto. Either the decipherer has made a most 
remarkable discovery to which the key has been open for three 
centuries, or the book is equally remarkable from an entirely 
different point of view. If accepted, truly "th' tardy epistle 
shall turn over an unknowne leaf of the historic of our land." 



73 



FRANCIS BACON'S BI-LITERAL CIPHER. 
Baconiana, London. 

Before these lines are printed, Mrs. Gallup's very important 
work on "The Biliteral Cipher of Francis Bacon"* will have 
been for two months in the hands of the public. Since it is 
probable that there may be due discussion of its wonderful con- 
tents, it seems desirable to say a few words, not by way of 
review or mere expression of personal opinion (in such a case 
valueless), but in order to draw attention to certain points 
which, if not at present capable of absolute verification or con- 
tradiction, yet surely demand and are worthy of the closest 
investigation. Questions of this kind must naturally arise, 
"Is this cipher such as any person of ordinary intelligence can 
follow? Is it provably correct? Has any one besides Mrs. 
Gallup succeeded in decpihering by the same means, and with 
similar results?" 

These questions may without hesitation be answered in the 
affirmative. With the explanation given by the great inventor 
himself, anyone can master the method described in the De 
Augmentis (Book VI.). Ordinary patience and contrivance 
enable us to arrange two different alphabets of Italic letters and 
to insert these in the printed type, forming cipher sentences 
one-fifth in length of the "exterior" sentence or passage. Thus 
to bury one story within another is easy enough. To unearth 
it is another matter, and more difficult. 

In the first place, there is nothing which particularly invites 
the decipherer to discriminate between the two forms of Italic 
letters which are essential to this typographical cipher; or, if 
differences or deformities in letters are observed, we have been 
required to believe them "errors," defects in printing, careless- 
ness of the compositor, or anything else which may explain 
them away. Be not deceived ; there is no error, but consum- 
mate skill and subtle contrivance, all helping towards the cryp- 
tographer's great ends. 



*Pub. : Gay and Bird, London. The Howard Publishing Company, 
Detroit. 

74 



Before beginning the work of deciphering, it is needful 
thoroughly to learn by heart the Biliteral Alphabet given by its 
Inventor in the De Augmentis. Here w^e see that the letters of 
the common Alphabet are formed by the combination of the 
letters A and B in five places, these two letters (A and B) being 
represented by two distinct "founts" of Italic type. To dis- 
criminate between these two founts, is the initial difficulty ; but 
observing that, in the Biliteral Alphabet, A's preponderate, and 
that no combination begins ivith tzvo B's, we judge that the 
most frequent forms of Italic letters are almost certain to be 
A's. A decision is best arrived at by repeatedly tracing and 
drawing out the various letters ; and the decipherer must have 
keen eyes and powers of observation to detect the minute dif- 
ferences. For our Francis would not make things too easy. 
He speaks of "marks" and "signs" to be heeded, and Roman 
letters are often interspersed. It is also patent (and was found 
by Mrs. Gallup, and independently by others) that, in every 
biliteral alphabet, letters are here and there intentionally ex- 
changed, as a device to confuse and confound the would-be 
decipherer. 

In many cases we find alphabets suddenly reversed — A 
becoming B, and B, A, a change hinted by some "mark' or 
"sign," as a tiny dot. These changes seem to occur most fre- 
quently in very small books, where the limited space makes it 
the more needful to set snares and stumbling-blocks at every 
turn. Such things show that, besides the good eyes and keen 
wits required for successful deciphering, there must be no small 
amount of that "eternal patience" which Michael Angelo hon- 
ored with the title of "genius." 

Let us contemplate the goodly volume presented to us by 
Mrs. Gallup, and try to realize the fact that every one of those 
350 pages of deciphered matter was worked out letter by letter; 
that each ONE letter in this deciphered work represents FIVE 
letters extracted from the deciphered book — say, Shakespeare, 
orSpenser, Burton, or any of the eight groups of works indi- 
cated in the cipher. Not only should such reflections cause us 
highly to respect the "endless patience," perseverance, and skill 
of the cryptographer to whose labors we are so deeply indebted, 
but they should warn us from depreciating or discrediting state- 
ments or methods which we ourselves are incapable of testing. ■ 
"Disparage not the faith thou dost not know," is a good, sound 
principle to begin upon, and Francis ("cunyng in the humours 
of persons") had evidently observed the tendency of the human 
mind to fly from things troublesome, or to take refuge in dis- 

75 



paragement and ridicule. His notes teem with reflections on 
this matter. "Things above us are nothing to us" — "just noth- 
ing." "Many things are thought impossible until they are dis- 
covered, then men wonder that they had not been seen long 
before." On the other hand, he continually encourages him- 
self with thoughts, texts and proverbial philosophy, which we 
find him instilling into his disciples. "Everything is subtile 
till it is conceived." "By trying, men gained Troy," and so 
forth. But we must "woorke as God woorkes," wisely, quietly, 
with persistent patience and unremitting care, and "from a 
good beginning cometh a good ending." 

So much, then, for the "biliteral" itself. Another crop of 
inquiries springs up when we attempt briefly to rehearse the 
wonderful revelations now before us, and which it is within our 
power to examine and essay to prove. 

Elizabeth, when princess, and prisoner in the hands of 
Mary, secretly married Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester. Of 
this secret marriage two sons were born. Francis the elder 
would have been "put away privilie" by the wicked woman 
whom he never could bring himself to think of as "mother." 
Lady Anne Bacon, however, saved his life, and under an oath 
of secrecy adopted him as her own son. The scene when these 
facts came to his knowledge, and again when they were tear- 
fully confirmed by his "deare," "sweete mother," Lady Anne, 
are graphically described in the cipher narrative extracted from 
the "History of Henry VH." (Ed. 1622). Further details of 
the same extraordinary episode are, as may be remembered, 
introduced in the "word cipher," discovered, and in part pub- 
lished, by Dr. Owen, some seven years ago. From the dis- 
closures made in the books deciphered, "it is evident," says 
Mrs. Gallup, "that Bacon expected the biliteral cipher to be 
the first discovered, and that it would lead to the finding of his 
principal or word cipher which it fully explains, and to which 
is intrusted the larger subjects he desired to have preserved. 
This order has been reversed, in fact, and the earlier discovery 
by Dr. Owen becomes a more remarkable achievement, being 
entirely evolved without the aids which Bacon had prepared in 
this for its elucidation." 

But to return to our story. 

Francis was now sent abroad by Elizabeth's orders {not, as 
has been declared by his biographers, because Sir Nicholas 
Bacon wished him to see the wonders of the world abroad, but) 
in order to get him out of the way at the time when he had been 
the unwitting cause of a Court scandal. He left England in 



76 



the suite of Sir Amyas Paiilet, the English Ambassador. We 
know a little, and surmise more, concerning his travels, and the 
places which he visited, or where he stayed studying and writ- 
ing. The sad story of his ill-fated love for "My Marguerite" 
is briefly touched upon, rather as a thing understood to the 
reader than as a record, and of this more will be related in a 
future volume. The present extracts are from the undated 4to. 
of Romeo and Juliet, where we may read : 

"This stage-play, in part, will tell our real love-tale. A 
part is in the Play previously nam'd or mention'd as having 
therein one pretty scene acted by the two. So rare and most 
briefe the hard-won happinesse, it affords us great content to 
re-live in the Play all that as mist, in summer morning did roule 
away. It hath place in the dramas containing a scene and 
theame of this nature, since our fond love interpreted th' harts 
o' others, and in this joy, th' joy of heaven was faintlie 
guessed." 

In the closing lines of King John are these instructions : 

"Join Romeo with Troy's famous Cressida if you wish to 

know my story. Cressida in this play with Juliet b ," 

which, says the Editor,* "ends the cipher in King John with an 
incomplete word. Turning to Romeo and Juliet (p. 53), the 
remainder of the word and of the broken sentence is continued, 
being a part of the description of Marguerite, and the love 
Francis entertained for her." 

This love never faded from his heart, although before he 
married, at the age of 47, he had, he says, hung up, as it were, 
the picture of his love on the walls of memory. We remember 
the calm and uneffusive fashion in which he then imparted to 
his friends the news that he had found "a handsome maiden 
who pleased him well." The tones in which he bewailed his 
lost love are pitched in a different key. 

"It is sometimes said, no man can be wise and love, and yet 
it would be well to observe many will be wiser after a lesson 
such as wee long ago conn'd. There was noe ease to our 
sufferi'g heart til our yeares of life were eight lustres. f The 
faire face liveth ever in dreames, but in inner pleasances only 
doth th' sunnie vision come. This will make clearlie scene 
why i' the part a man doth play heerein and where-ere man's 
love is evident, strength hath remained unto the end — the 
want'n Paris recov'ring by his latter venture much previouslie 
lost." 



*"Introduction," p. 11. 

tHe speaks in the third person — as a royal personage. 



77 



A second son was born to Elizabeth, and named Robert, 
after his father, the Earl of Leicester. Robert was "made 
ward" of Walter Devereaux, Earl of Essex, who "died" con- 
veniently and unexpectedly, when Robert was old enough to 
succeed to his title and estates. At what period the brothers 
became aware of their kinship has not yet been told in the cipher. 
Francis describes the personal beauty, gallantry, and boldness 
of his brother, and says that for these qualities Robert was a 
great favorite with the Queen, who thought that he resembled 
herself. The tale is still incomplete; but enough has already 
been disclosed to give us a firm sketch of the miserable outline. 
We see Robert taking advantage of the Queen's doting fond- 
ness for him, and Francis endeavoring to keep his ambition 
within bounds, and to smooth matters with his irascible mother 
when, as was often the case, she became irritated beyond endur- 
ance by his arrogant audacity. The aim of Essex was, not only 
in the future to supplant his elder brother, but even in the 
Queen's lifetime to seize the crown, and rule as king. It is a 
dark and painful page in history, and the more we read the less 
we marvel at the efforts made by Elizabeth to destroy or garble 
the records of her own private life, and of the times in which 
she lived. Having spoilt and indulged Essex so long as she 
believed him devoted to herself, she turned upon him "in a tiger- 
like spirit" when his treachery became patent, and because 
Francis had spoken strongly on his brother's behalf, and had 
endeavored to shield him from the wrath of the Queen, she 
punished him by forcing him, under pain of death, to conduct 
the case (in his oi'ficial capacity) against Essex, whom she had 
foredoomed to execution. An allusion is made to the ring 
which the Queen expected Essex to send her, but which miscar- 
ried. This story has been held doubtful, but it seems as though 
we may find it true. 

The sentence passed upon Essex was just ; but the horror of 
the trial and the circumstances connected with the execution, 
haunted Francis for the rest of his life, his tender and sensitive 
nature, and his highly strung imagination continually reviving, 
whilst they shrank from, the recollection of the horrible details 
of which hereafter we shall have to read. Although Francis 
speaks in affectionate terms of his "deere" and cruelly used 
brother, we cannot but think that the tenderness grew out of a 
deep pity ; for Robert had long ago proved himself a most 
selfish and unsatisfactory person, and a perpetual thorn in his 
brother's side, but, however this may have been, the gruesome 
tragedy remained imprinted on his soul, and clouded and embit- 

78 



tered his whole Hfe. "His references to the trial and execution 
of Essex, and the part he was forced to take in his prosecution, 
are the subject of a wail of unhappiness and ever-present 
remorse, with hopes and prayers that the truth hidden in this 
cipher may be found out, and published to the world in his 
justification. 

"O God ! forgiveness cometh from Thee ; shut not this 
truest book, my God! Shut out my past — love's little sunny 
hour — if it soe please Thee, and some of man's worthy work; 
yet Essex's tragedy here shew forth ; then posterity shall know 
him truly."* 

The Queen commanded Francis to write for publication an 
account of the Earl of Essex's treasons, and he did so. But 
the report was too lenient, too tender for the reputation of the 
Earl to satisfy his vindictive mother. She destroyed the docu- 
ment and with her own hand wrote another which was pub- 
lished under his name, and for which he has been held responsi- 
ble. Such matters as these were State secrets,- and we cannot 
wonder that Elizabeth should have taken care by all means in 
her power to prevent them from becoming public property by 
appearing in print. We may well believe that, as the cipher 
tells us, all papers were destroyed which were likely to bring 
dark things to light. Nevertheless much must have gradually 
leaked out through the actors themselves, and more must have 
been suspected, and only through dread of the consequences 
withheld from general discussion. "See what a ready tongue 
suspicion hath" ; in private letters and hidden records the value 
of which is perhaps now for the first time fully understood, 
evidence is forthcoming to substantiate statements made in the 
deciphered pages of Mrs. Gallup, and her forerunner. Dr. Owen. 

The matter gathered from the deciphered pages is not lim- 
ited to personal or political history. For instance, speaking of 
the "Anatomy of Melancholy (edition, 1628), the Editor 
says : — "The extraordinary part is that this edition conceals, in 
cipher, a very full and extended prose summary — argument. 
Bacon calls it — of a translation of Homer's Iliad. In order 
that there may be no mistake as to its being Bacon's works, he 
precedes the translation with a brief reference to his royal birth, 

and the wrongs he has suffered In the De Aug- 

mentis is found a similar extended synopsis of a translation of 
the Odyssey. This, too, is introduced with a reference to 
Bacon's personal history, and although the text of the book is 
in Latin, the cipher is in English. 

*Introduction, p. 8. It seems probable that this was written soon after 
the events in 1601. 

79 



The decipherer is not a Greek scholar, and would be incapa- 
ble of creating these extended arguments, which differ widely 
in phrasing from any translation extant, and are written in a 
free and flowing style."* 

Readers must not expect to find in this book which we are 
noticing, a complete and shapely narrative explaining every- 
thing, and pouring out before us the true story of our wonder- 
ful "concealed man" from beginning to end. The cipher utter- 
ances are, for the most part, nothing if not fragmentary. The 
writer himself says so, and adds that his objects in thus trust- 
ing his secrets to the care of his friends and to the judgment of 
time were, First, that he might hand down to the future age 
the only faithful account of himself and his history, which 
would ever be allowed to reach them. Secondly, he proposed 
to link his unacknowledged works one with another in such a 
way that hereafter his sons of science should from the hints 
given in one work be led on to another, and so to another, until 
the vast mass of books. Historical, Scientific, Poetical, Dramat- 
ical, Philosophical, which he wrote, should be connected, welded 
together like an endless chain, and the true history of the Great 
Restauration and of the English Renaissance fully revealed. 

*Introduction, p. 13. 



80 



THE BACONIAN CIPHER*— I. 

By Fleming Fulchek. 

The Court Journal, London. 

Dr. Rawley, "his Lordship's first and last chaplain," relates 
in his Life of Lord Bacon that "when his History of King 
Henry the Seventh was to come forth, it was delivered to the 
old Lord Brooke to be perused by him, who, when he had 
dispatched it, returned it to the author with this eulogy: 'bid 
him take care to get good paper and inke; for the work is 
incomparable.' " We think "the old Lord Brooke" would 
have been justified in sending this message (with a change 
of pronoun) to the authoress of The Biliteral Cipher of Sir 
Francis Bacon (for in its own way it is incomparable), and 
we think he would have been satisfied with the result. 

The book is divided into two parts, the first containing 
introductory chapters, portraits, and facsimiles, while the 
second, rather more than three-quarters of the book, consists 
entirely of the story deciphered. The introductory chapters 
are short, pithy, and well-written, and are full of literary 
interest. The first chapter, from the pen of Mrs. Gallup herself, 
tells how she came to discover the existence of the cipher in 
certain books, and gives a brief account of her work, a work, 
to quote her own words, "arduous, exhausting and prolonged" ; 
and shows how, though her discovery "may change the names 
of some of our idols," we are gainers, not losers, by the change. 
If we can find a fault in this chapter, it is that there is only 
enough of it to whet our appetite for more details of the 
progress of her work. Perhaps we may hope that she will 
satisfy us in this respect on a future occasion when her work 
becomes widely known and read, as it deserves to be. After 
Mrs. Gallup's "personal" chapter there follows the introduc- 
tion to the first edition — printed for private circulation only. 
It gives a short summary of the principal facts of the cipher 
story, and touches on points of interest in connection with 
the cipher, two of which we will briefly allude to here. It 
shows how the cipher explains the reason for the extraordinary 

*The Biliteral Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon, by Mrs. Gallup. 

81 



mispaging of the original editions, carefully adhered to in all 
the copies, and of which no one had previously been able to 
offer a satisfactory explanation ; and it touches on the curious 
history of The Anatomy of Melancholy, which for nearly three 
centuries has been attributed to Burton, but which the British 
Museum catalogue shows to have been first published under 
another name when Burton was about ten years old, and of 
which in the cipher story Francis Bacon claims the authorship. 
The preface of the second edition, the one we are now con- 
sidering and the first given to the public, shows the cogent 
reasons Bacon had for using the cipher. "Two distinct pur- 
poses," says the author, "are served by the two ciphers. The 
Biliteral was the foundation which was intended to lead to 
the other, and is of prime importance in its directions concern- 
ing the construction of the Word Cipher, the keys, and the 
epitome of the topics which were to be written out by its 
aid. It seems also to have been * * >i= ^ sort of diary 
* * * * ^^^^ ^g -j-^ jjiany another diary, we find the trend 
of the inind as affected by the varying moods — sometimes 
sad and mournful — again defiant and rebellious — and again 
despondent, almost in despair, that his wrongs might fail of 
discovery, even in the times and land afar off to which he 
looked for greater honor and fame, as well as vindication. 

"Chafing under the cloud upon his birth, the victim of a des- 
tiny beyond his control, which ever placed him in a false posi- 
tion, defrauded of his birthright, which was of the highest, he 
committed to this cipher the plaints of an outraged soul. * * * 
To the decipherer, he unbends — to the rest of the world main- 
tains the dignity which marked his outward life. * * * It is a 
wonderful revelation of the undercurrents of a hidden life." 

"Some Notes on the Shakespeare Plays," and a reprint of 
an article on Shorthand in the days of Elizabeth from the 
able pen of Mrs. H. Pott, whose clear and logical mind, no 
less than her deep research into the literature of Bacon's 
time, makes her writings always welcome; and lastly a brief 
sketch of the outlines of Bacon's life, complete the original 
portion of Part I. While the importance of these introduc- 
tory chapters lies for our immediate purpose in their applica- 
tion to the Biliteral Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon, it would 
be difficult to overestimate their intrinsic merit, literary and 
historical. We owe a debt of gratitude to the authoress and 
publishers for their liberality in the matter of facsimiles by 
which they enable us not only to follow the deciphering but 
also to familiarize ourselves with the style and appearance 
of the original editions of many old favorites, a privilege 



hitherto ahnost confined to those who have time and oppor- 
tunity for visiting the great hbraries. In this part are com- 
prised Bacon's description of his BiHteral Cipher, with 
examples and double alphabet; the frontispiece and preface 
to the Novum Orgamwt, preceded by a table of the double 
alphabet, by means of which the cipher is unfolded; the 
Droeshout portrait and all the introductory pages of the 
famous 1623 folio of the Shakespeare plays; and the title 
pages of several other of the deciphered works. The preface 
to the Novum Organiim is also given in modern type, the two 
founts being marked a and h respectively, thus enabling the 
reader to follow in extenso the method of deciphering. 

The portraits of Bacon, two in number, to which we have 
alluded, are the well-known one in which he is seen in his Chan- 
cellor's robes, and the exquisite miniature of Hilyard sur- 
rounded by the noblest halo that ever adorned a human portrait 
— "Si tabula daretur digna, animum mallem" (If it were pos- 
sible to have a canvas worthy, I had rather paint his mind"). 

Of the second part, because it is the most important, we 
shall say least. The story it tells is startling, fascinating, 
strange. As fiction it would be unique; as history, though 
truth is proverbially stranger than fiction, it is unparalleled. 
Nothing that can give interest to a book is wanting. There 
is the excitement of discovery; the triumph of hidden truth 
brought to light, of error refuted; the romance of a great 
prince, robbed of his birthright, who finds his consolation in 
winning a nobler realm — the kingdom of the mind ; the trag- 
edy of a younger brother, a wild though generous spirit, 
seduced by misdirected ambition into the thorny path of rebel- 
lion that leads to the question and the block; the pathos of 
a noble soul torn by the pangs of remorse for the part he 
was forced to take in that brother's death by the inexorable 
power of the loftiest sense of justice — that power which 
impelled Lucius Junius Brutus to "call his 30ns to punish- 
ment," Marcus Brutus to robe his daggei" in the imperial 
purple of liberty drawn from the veins of his "best lover" ; 
while the one note wanting to complete the full chord of 
romance is struck in the tale of a fruitless passion for the fair 
Queen of Navaire. Besides the story of Bacon's own life 
and times, or rather of that part of his life and times hitherto 
unknown to history, the deciphered story gives directions for 
working out his "Word Cipher," and summaries of those noble 
poems of Homer, the Illiad and Odyssey, with some passages 
translated into blank verse, which we think will compare favor- 
ably with any previous translations. 

83 



A few words must suffice as to the style. As we have 
already quoted, the book is a diary; and the exigencies of 
secrecy necessitate much repetition. For, as Bacon himself 
notes in the cipher story, he could not tell what book might 
be lost, or in which of those that survived, his decipherer 
would first light on the discovery. Yet in parts the writing 
rises to a great height of eloquence. We cannot resist the 
temptation to quote two passages from the cipher which seem 
to us, each in its own way, eminently beautiful. The first, 
though it refers only to the difficulty of constructing the 
Word Cipher can, we think, hardly be surpassed for happiness 
of metaphors or grace of diction. "'Tis the labour of years," 
says Bacon, "to provide th' widely varied prose in which the 
lines of verse have a faire haven, and lye anchor'd untill a 
day when th' coming pow'r may say: 'Hoist sayle, away! 
For the windes of heav'n kisse your fairy streamers, and th' 
tide is afloode. On to thy destiny!' " 

The second is the cry of a soul in anguish. 

"O Source infinite of light, ere Time in existence was, save 
in Thy creative plan, all this tragedy unfolded before Thee. A 
night of Stygian darknesse encloseth us. My hope banish'd to 
realms above, taketh its flight through th' clear aire of the 
Scyences unto bright daye with Thyself e. As thou didst con- 
ceale Thy lawes in thick clouds, enfolde them in shades of 
mysterious gloom. Thou didst infuse from Thy spirit a desire 
to put the day's glad work, th' evening's thought, and mid- 
night's meditation to finde out their secret workings. 

"Only thus can I banish from my thoughts my beloved 
brother's untimely cutting off and my^ wrongfull part in his 
tryale. O, had I then one thought of th' great change his 
death would cause — how life's worth would shrinke, and this 
world's little golden sunshine be but as collied night's swifte 
lightning — this had never come as a hound of th' hunt to my 
idle thoughts." Mrs. Gallup's claim to have discovered the ex- 
istence of Francis Bacon's Biliteral Cipher in many of the works 
of his time is one which, in view of the story deciphered, will, if 
substantiated, oblige us to rewrite a page of history and to tear 
a mask from many an idol before which we have bowed for 
three centuries. We shall, therefore, require the most convinc- 
ing proofs of the bona fides of the discovery. The discussion 
of this question, however, we leave to a future article. 



84 



THE BACONIAN CIPHER— II. 
By Eleming Eulchek. 

Last week we reviewed the subject matter of "The Biliteral 
Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon" by Mrs. Gallup. This week 
we have to redeem the promise then made to discuss the claims 
which the discovery embodied in it has on our credence. Let 
us first clearly define what that discovery claims to be. It is 
not that Francis Bacon invented a cipher which he calls 
"Biliteral." That is a fact which has been known to the world 
for three centuries. What the authoress claims to have dis- 
covered is that this cipher is used in all the original editions 
of Bacon's printed works, and that she has deciphered the 
hidden story by means of it. If this claim can be substan- 
tiated, it will decide once for all the Bacon v. Shakespeare 
controversy in favor of the former, for in the deciphered story 
Bacon claims the authorship of the Shakespeare plays and 
poems, as well as of other works which we have been accus- 
tomed to attribute, in some cases on little or no evidence, to 
others of his "masques." 

Some fifty years ago the theory was started, independently 
on both sides of the Atlantic, that "Shakespeare" was in 
reality only a pen-name of Francis Bacon, and that it is to 
that great genius, not to the actor of Stratford-on-Avon, that 
the world owes its finest dramas. A storm of derision, of 
course, greeted the theory, as it does every theory that attacks 
a generally accepted belief, however erroneous ; and it was 
only necessary to hold the theory to be at once classed with 
the inmates of a lunatic asylum — though one would hardly 
have supposed such an institution a suitable residence (exempli 
gratia) for Lord Palmerston. Just such a storm of ridicule, 
coupled with persecution, happily for "Baconians" impossible 
in the nineteenth century, greeted Galileo's discovery that the 
earth moves round the sun. "E puo si muove," and during 
the past fifty years the Baconian theory, under the influence 
of careful and patient investigation of internal and external 
evidence, has been steadily gaining ground. A fair example 
of the way in which the Baconian theory is met by its adver- 
saries is the reply which was given to a friend of the present 

85 



writer by a well-known scholar and "Shakespearian" authority : 
"If Shakespeare were to rise from the grave and tell me that 
Bacon was the author of the plays, I would not believe him." 
Take another typical specimen; it is a criticism (save the 
mark!) on the work we are now considering that appeared 
recently in a daily contemporary : — "A fresh campaign by 
the Baconian zealots is threatened. Mrs. Elizabeth Wells 
Gallup claims to have discovered and deciphered the mysteri- 
ous secrets which Bacon, she would have us believe, buried in 
his writings. In the 'Biliteral Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon,' 
Greene, Peele, and Marlowe, as well as Shakespeare, all go 
by the board; Sir Francis explains to Mrs. Gallup that their 
dramatic works were written by him alone. The proofs, she 
says, are 'overwhelming and irresistible.' The day will come 
when Macaulay's New Zealander will debate whether Bacon 
was a solar myth or a sort of Homer, who gathered together 
all Elizabethan literature in a — cipher." But ridicule and 
invective are not argument, prejudice is not proof. "Some 
of our friends," we used to be told in our childhood, "are for 
warning, others for example." Taking those we have quoted 
for warning, let us give a fair and open-minded consideration 
to Mrs. Gallup's claims. 

To do this it will be necessary to describe Bacon's Biliteral 
Cipher. His own description of it may be seen in any edition 
of his De Augmentis. Its principle is extremely simple, being, 
in fact, that of the Morse Code at present used in telegraphy — 
namely, various combinations of two differences. Thus, if 
we have two dissimilar things or sets of things, represented, 
let us suppose, by a and h respectively, there are thirty-two 
different ways in which we can arrange them in sets of five; 
as, for example, aaaaa, aaaab, a a aba, and so on. (It 
should be noted that in these groups a and b are merely used 
as symbols to represent two differences which might be equally 
well represented by dots and dashes or any other convenient 
symbols.) Now, by using twenty- four such groups, out of 
the possible thirty-two, and letting each stand for a different 
letter of the alphabet (in Bacon's day I and J counted as one 
letter, as did also U and V), we can communicate by means 
of two differences with anyone who knows what letter each 
group stands for. Bacon's method, the advantage of which 
lies in being able to insert anything in anything — omnia per 
omnia, as he says — is to have two complete sets, or "founts" 
as they are called, of type, which he designates the a and b 
fount respectively. All that is then necessary is to write out 
the secret message in its biliteral form letter for letter over or 

86 



under the matter to be printed, and, as each letter is required, 
to take it from the a or b fount according as the one or the 
other letter appears against it. For example, suppose the 
words to be printed are "The Court Journal," and that we 
want to "infold" in this the signature "Fr. B.," and suppose 
our a fount to consist of Latin and our b fount of Italic letters. 
Now, in Bacon's biliteral alphabet F is represented by a a b a b, 
R by b a a a a, and B by a a a a b. Our MS. would, therefore, 
appear thus : 

THE COURT JOURNAL, 
aab abbaa aaaaaab 

In printing we should take the T and H from the a fount, 
the E from the b fount, and so on. The words would then 
appear thus : 

TH£ COURT JOURNAL. 

The decipherer would mark the letters according to their 
respective founts, divide it into groups of five, and, knowing 
what letter each group stands for, would read "Fr. B." 

In these days of publicity we find it hard to accept any- 
thing that savors of mystery, and tolerance of opinion and 
freedom of speech have made it difficult to credit that a man 
should have had motive sufficient for putting a cipher in his 
books. Yet, at the present day all internal state correspond- 
ence is carried on in cipher. Why? Because every other 
state is a potential enemy. And this same reason made cipher 
writing common among individuals in the sixteenth and 
seventeenth centuries, for in those days when "a man's head 
stood tickle on his shoulders" every other individual, with 
perhaps the exception of a few intimates, was a potential 
enemy. But in the case of Francis Bacon there are special 
reasons why we should not wonder at his putting a cipher, 
and that his own Biliteral Cipher, into his published works ; 
and we shall be able to show that so far from its being strange 
that he should do so, it would be strange had he not. He 
invented this cipher at the age of about sixteen or seventeen, 
when he was in Paris. Nearly thirty years later, in 1605, he 
published his great philosophical work Of the Advancement of 
Learning. It is significant that he should have thought ciphers 
of sufficient importance to be touched on in his work, and that 
he should have alluded to this particular cipher as "the highest 
degree of cyphers which is to write omnia per omnia,"'' 

In 1623 he published a Latin version of The Advancement 
under the title De Augnicntis Scientiarnin. This is not even 
a mere translation. The book has been entirely rewritten and 

87 



greatly enlarged, and is translated into Latin professedly 
because he feared that the English language wanted stability, 
while he believed that Latin would be the language of the 
learned for all time. Surely now, after nearly two crowded 
decades of Statecraft, of Law, of Philosophy, in which he has 
"sounded all the depths and shoals of honour," the eminent 
statesman, the learned lawyer, the profound philosopher will 
find no room in his immortal work for what we are apt to 
consider an ingenious amusement for a schoolboy. Far from 
being omitted, however, the paragraph on ciphers is enlarged 
to some pages, the greater part devoted to a detailed descrip- 
tion and examples of the cipher alluded to by him nearly a 
score of years before, invented by him nearly half a century 
earlier. But before we can realize the full force of these facts 
it will be necessary to glance at some of the leading traits of 
Bacon's character. It is not too much to say that most peo- 
ple's knowledge of this great man is derived — directly or indi- 
rectly — almost exclusively from one essay and one line of 
poetry; while few have read anything of his writings except 
his essays. Macaulay's essay, as far as it deals with the moral 
side of Bacon's character, is probably the greatest libel on a 
great man that ever masqueraded in the "weed" of criticism, 
and Pope's line is the text of Macaulay's essay in half a dozen 
words. Both have painted as the portrait of Bacon a figure 
impossible in human nature, "a vast idol," as Hepworth Dixon 
well expresses it, "the head of gold and feet of clay." But 
this writer and Spedding have dipped deep into the well of 
Truth, and with her waters have washed away the mud which 
had been flung by the envious hands of the pigmy contempor- 
aries over whom Francis Bacon towered, and have shown the 
whole figure to be sterling gold from head to foot. Even 
Macaulay and Pope, however, while they mistake Bacon's 
moral nature, acknowledge the vastness and exquisiteness of 
his intellect, though again on this side they fail to appreciate 
fully his "infinite capacity for taking pains." "His under- 
standing," says the brilliant essayist, "with great minuteness 
of observation had an aptitude of comprehension such as has 
never yet been vouchsafed to any other human being. The 
small fine mind of Labruyere had not a more delicate tact than 
the large intellect of Bacon. * * * His understanding 
resembfed the tent which the fairy Paribanov gave to Prince 
Ahmed. Fold it ; and it seemed a toy for the hand of a lady. 
Spread it; and the armies of powerful Sultans might repose 
beneath its shade." 



88 



Bacon's, then, was just such a temperament as would have 
dehghted in the continual application of his cipher; one to 
which the great labor involved — a labor which to most would 
be insufferable drudgery — would have been a congenial exer- 
cise or might have proved a welcome distraction from painful 
memories. There is one more point which has an important 
bearing in this connection. The guiding star of Bacon's life 
was utility. Everything he studied — and what did he not 
study? — he studied with a view to the use that could be made 
of it. And utility was_the mainspring of his least actions no 
less than of his loftiest philosophy. If this be granted, and 
we believe no one will for a moment dispute it, we have the 
strongest probability, nay, the absolute certainty, that he used 
the cipher which he invented and published. But where? 
Only one answer is possible — "In his printed works." For 
we have seen that it is to be performed by means of two founts 
of type. One more question naturally suggests itself. "Had 
he adequate motives for imposing on himself the labor which 
the extensive use of the cipher involves?" This can only be 
answered when the secret is no longer a secret, when the cipher 
is deciphered. The story as deciphered by Mrs. Gallup gives 
an emphatic answer in the affirmative. The statements 
unfolded by her are such that, while their publication during 
his lifetime would have been productive of no good, it would 
have cost him his life. But in the interests of truth and for 
his own justification he wished them to be given t6 a future 
age. It was with this object that he began to use the cipher, 
and he continued its use as a distraction from the agonies of 
retrospection. We have now established, as we think, beyond 
contradiction, the fact that so far from being incredulous as 
to the existence of the biliteral cipher in Bacon's works, we 
ought to expect it. How is it, then, the reader will say, that 
it has remained undiscovered for so long? It is the old story 
once more of Columbus and the egg, or, as Mrs. Gallup aptly 
quotes from Bacon himself, "in which sort of things it is the 
manner of men, first to wonder that such a thing should be 
possible, and after it is found out, to wonder again how the 
world should miss it so long." 



89 



THE BACOMAN CIPHER.— III. 
By Eleming Eulcher. 

Our discussion of this question last week led us by a priori 
argument to the conclusion that Francis Bacon had put a 
cipher story into his printed works. 

Now, either this long-neglected cipher has at last been 
discovered and deciphered or it has not. That is a truism. 
In the latter case two, and only two, hypotheses are possible; 
if they can be shown to be false, the affirmative proposition is 
established. These two hypotheses are — (i) that a deliberate 
fraud is being perpetrated; (2) that with perfectly honest 
intentions our authoress has, to use a familiar expression, 
"cooked" the cipher, and consequently the story is in reality 
the creation of her own brain. It would be a wonderful brain, 
indeed, that could have devised and executed such a work. 
The first supposition, we do not hesitate to say, will be at once 
dismissed by anyone who has even a slight acquaintance with 
the authoress. But as this is a privilege necessarily denied to 
the great majority of our readers, let us examine the question 
impersonally and impartially on its own merits. The "fraud" 
hypothesis would mean this — that the author had deliberately 
invented the whole story, and stated without the slightest 
foundation in fact that when resolved into Francis Bacon's 
biliteral alphabet it would be found to correspond, letter by 
letter, with the two founts of Italic type which occur in such 
profusion in the works deciphered — for it is through the Italics 
that the cipher runs. Of the existence of different founts of 
Italic type in these works there is no question. It has long 
been known, though never hitherto explained ; and anyone can 
verify this assertion by a glance at the original editions, or at 
the facsimiles in The Biliteral Cipher of Sir Francis Bacon. 

Now, to ensure this correspondence between the cipher 
story and the Italic print it would be necessary to count the 
letters in the latter — in itself a task almost as great as the 
genuine deciphering. And this would be but a small part of 
the labor required. It would be far surpassed by the immense 
amount of literary, linguistic, and historical knowledge and 
research indispensable for the avoidance of errors which would 

90 



soon be detected by the critics, and which would at once expose 
the fraud. Again, we might easily conceive that the author 
of our hypothetical fraud would pretend to find a secret his- 
tory of Bacon's time, with all its tragic interest, but it would 
be hard indeed to imagine that the idea would suggest itself 
of pretending to find summaries of and poetical translations 
from the Iliad and the Odyssey, or that the author would be 
capable of expressing them with such true Baconian intuition 
and freedom as they display. Still less is it likely that the 
author would run the risk of wearying his readers with direc- 
tions for working out another cipher, which would also, pre- 
sumably, be non-existent, or with frequent repetitions, which, 
however, will be seen to be necessary if the cipher is genuine. 
These considerations, we are aware, though they amount to 
a moral certainty of the impossibility of the "fraud" hypothesis, 
do not constitute a mathematical proof of it. There is, how- 
ever, one which seems to us to do so. In the case of some of 
the letters the differences between the two founts are so slight 
that it would be difficult, without more study than most people 
would be prepared to give, to pronounce with certainty to 
which fount these letters belonged. But, on the other hand, 
in the case of many of the letters — most of the capitals and 
some of the small letters — the differences are "so plaine as thou 
canst not erre therein." Now, as these letters stand in fixed 
places and must be marked always a or h according to their 
respective founts, the fraud would at once be detected, for it 
is a mathematical impossibility that the a's and h's of the bilit- 
eral form of a story not composed with reference to the actual 
letters could always fall in the right place. So much for the 
fraud hypothesis. The hypothesis of unintentional "cooking" 
may be very briefly dismissed. We had intended tp give some 
rough calculations which would have demonstrated the unten- 
ability of this theory, but space and our readers' patience, or 
rather the certain want of the one and the probable exhaustion 
of the other, forbid. When, however, it is considered that 
the cipher story has to be got out letter by letter from the 
printed matter; that it takes five letters of the latter to make 
one of the former: and that if one letter were got out it would 
give no assistance in extracting the next ; unless there were a 
cipher there, it will be seen that no assistance would be obtained 
from the doubtful letters, and that it would be impossible to 
obtain any sense in this way. We have now fairly examined 
the only two hypotheses on which it is possible that Mrs. 
Gallup's claim can be a "bogus" one, and proved them false. 
Thus we are driven by the inexorable force of logic to the only 

91 



remaining conclusion : That Francis Bacon did put a cipher 
into his printed works ; that Mrs. Gallup has discovered it and 
has translated it. 

We had intended to produce much corroborative evidence 
which, though we now find it superfluous, we believe would 
have been interesting. The exigencies of space again prevent 
us. One piece, however, is so curious that we feel sure our 
readers will pardon us if we produce it. We can vouch for the 
fact that it was unknown to our authoress when the statement 
it corroborates was deciphered. In the north of London there 
is still standing a square building of red brick, dating from 
the reign of Henry VIII., which is known as Canonbury 
Tower. That in no history of the tower, nor in any life of 
Bacon is mention made of its being connected with him, is only 
one of the numerous instances of the mystery which always 
meets us when we try to search deeper into the life of Francis 
Bacon. Yet research at one of the public libraries has recently 
elicited the fact that he took a lease of it for ninety-nine years, 
that he lived there for some time, apparently in charge of the 
Princes Henry and Charles, sons of James I., and that he was 
actually living there at the time he received the seals. 

Close under the ceiling, on the wall, in a dark corner of a 
passage in the Tower, is painted an inscription consisting of 
the Sovereigns of England from the Conquest. The names 
are mostly abbreviated, and with one exception follow each 
other in the recognized order. But between Elizabeth and 
James stands, in the same way as the other abbreviations, Fr. 
No explanation of this interpolation appeared until the 
deciphered story brought to light the facts that Queen Eliza- 
beth was secretly married to the Earl of Leicester, and that 
the great man whom we have known as Francis Bacon was 
in reality her first-born son, and therefore the true, though 
unacknowledged, heir to the throne. 

We must not conclude without a slight tribute, not the 
less sincere that it must of necessity be brief, to the merits of 
Mrs. Gallup's brilliant discovery, and the patient diligence 
with which she has gradually unrolled the cerements and 
brought to light one by one truths so long buried. We feel 
almost tempted to envy the feelings which must have swept 
over her as the first sentence came to light from its cipher 
tomb. They must have been such as stirred the soul of 
Columbus when, after the long night of impatient expecta- 
tion, the light of morning broke and revealed to his triumphant 
gaze the shores of the new continent. Let us frankly confess 

92 



our gratitude to our authoress, who has enabled us to feel 
once more the "touch of a vanished hand," to hear once more 
"the sound of a voice that is still" — a hand that was ever 
stretched down from lofty height to help and raise humanity, 
a voice that will ring trumpet-tongued through all ages — the 
hand and voice 'of one who "had an aspect as if he pitied men." 



The reference to Canonbury Tower, by Mr. Fulcher, 
renders the following quotations from a late number of 
"Baconiana" of especial interest, as tracing the history of 
this ancient and historic pile. The building is in a good 
state of preservation. The lines are in an obscure part of 
the building but are plainly observable, as was verified by a 
personal examination on the part of Mrs. Gallup, in Novem- 
ber last. It is one of the interesting corroborations which 
are accumulating, and now being understood in the light of 
the cipher disclosures, going to show that Francis was 
entitled to a place in the line of England's kings. 



93 



A XEW LIGHT. 
OIST THE BACO^— SHAKESPEAEE CYPHER. 



The JSTineteentii Century and After. — London. 



Of all the critical paradoxes that have ever been seriously advo- 
cated, few have been received with such general and derisive 
indifference as that which declares Bacon to have been the 
author of the dramas ascribed to Shakespeare, and which 
couples this declaration with another — more startling still — 
that these dramas are not dramas only, but are besides a series 
of writings in cypher, whose inner meaning bears no relation 
whatever to their ostensible meaning as dramas, but which con- 
sist of memoranda or memoirs concerning Bacon himself, and 
secrets of Queen Elizabeth. The mere theory that Bacon was 
the real author of the plays, though the mass of Shakespeare's 
readers still set it down as an illusion, does not, indeed, contain 
anything essentially shocking to common sense. On the con- 
trary, it is generally recognised that on purely a priori grounds 
there is less to shock common sense in the idea that those won- 
derful compositions were the work of a scholar, a philosopher, 
a statesman, and a profound man of the world, than there is in 
the idea that they were the work of a notoriously ill-educated 
actor, who seems to have found some difficulty in signing his 
own name. This latter idea, which is still generally accepted, 
has little evidence to support it beyond tradition, which is strong, 
and strong only, in the absence of evidence to the contrary ; and 
were such evidence forthcoming, it would be impossible for the 
candid mind to reject it on the grounds that it pointed to any 
improbable conclusion. 

But with regard to the theory of the cypher the case is dif- 
ferent. This is generally rejected or neglected both by scholars 

94 



and the reading public, not on the ground that the evidence for 
it is insufficient, but on the ground that it is in itself so unlikely, 
so fantastic, so impossible that it is not worth a sane man's while 
to consider the misguided ingenuities by which a few literary 
monomaniacs have endeavoured to make it plausible How is 
it possible, the ordinary man asks, to believe that the finest and 
profoundest poetry in the world — that the verses which give us 
in music the love of Romeo and Juliet, the torture of Hamlet's 
philosophy, the majestic calm of Prospero's — was composed, or 
rather constructed, as an elaborate verbal puzzle, the object of 
which was to preserve for some future decipherer a collection of 
political and mainly person.al information, which the author was 
too timid to confide himself to his contemporaries ? We might 
just as well believe that Paradise Lost is in reality a kind of 
Pepys' Diary, in which the poet has recorded for posterity the 
curtain-lectures of Mrs. Milton. Such is the argument which 
the ordinary man uses ; and if he consents to consider the matter 
a little farther, and finds, as he will find, that the advocates of 
the cypher theory maintain that Bacon, in the Shakespearian 
plays, has hidden away not one cypher but six, his dismissal of 
their theory will be yet more curt and contemptuous. Of this 
attitude of mind I am able to speak with sympathy, for the excel- 
lent reason that it was till lately my own. A remarkable vol- 
ume, however, known at present to surprisingly few readers, has 
been recently published, dealing with the subject before us — a 
volume which at first I glanced at with apathetic distrust, but 
which has caused me, when I read it carefully, to reconsider the 
question. The contents of this volume I shall here briefly sum- 
marise, leaving the reader to escape from its conclusions if he 
can. The volume is called The Bi-literal Cypher of Francis 
Bacon. It was first, I believe, printed privately, less than two 
years ago ; and a small second edition was issued last year to the 
public. I will begin with describing its exact scope, which is 
limited. Of the six Baconian cyphers alleged to exist in Shake- 
speare, this volume deals only with one; and it is with this one 
only that I shall ask the reader to concern himself. 

The biliteral cypher possesses two remarkable character- 
istics, which it is desirable to mention at starting, because they 
at once dispose of all those a priori objections which suggest 
themselves, as we have just seen, against the cypher theory gen- 

95 



erally. In the first place this cypher, whether it exists in the 
Shakespearian plays or not, is demonstrably not the invention 
of any modern literary lunatic. It was invented by Bacon him- 
self ; and an elaborate account of it, together with examples of its 
use, is to be found, as will be shown presently, in one of his most 
celebrated works. In the second place — and this is a point 
which it is still more important to urge on the a priori sceptic — 
the biliteral cypher has nothing whatever to do with the com- 
position or the wording of the works into which it is introduced. 
There might be a biliteral cypher in Hamlet from end to end, 
without any thought of a cypher having been present to the 
author when he was writing it. It is, in other words, altogether 
a matter of typography. It depends not on what the author 
writes, but on the manner in which he is printed. Accordingly, 
v/hen what we may call the Baconian party informs the world 
that they have discovered a biliteral cypher, of which the author 
is Bacon, running through the plays of Shakespeare, they are 
really indulging in a gross inaccuracy of language, which does 
much to prevent a fair hearing being accorded to them. What 
they really mean is that this biliteral cypher runs not through the 
plays themselves, but through one particular edition of them — 
that is to say, the celebrated first folio. This edition, as every 
student knows, is remarkable for many extraordinary anomalies 
in its typography. Of these anomalies an explanation is now for 
the first time offered to us. They are presented to us — and it is 
claimed that they are thus explained completely — as part and 
parcel of the newly discovered typographical cypher. If we take 
these devices away the cypher disappears with them. If we 
resort, with the aid of the printer, to devices of the same kind, we 
could embody the cypher anew, and every sentence that Bacon 
committed to it, in any book we might choose to reprint, so far 
as its length permitted — in Pickwick, in Vanity Fair, in Tup- 
per's Proverbial Philosophy, in the Apocalypse of St. John, or in 
the advertisement-sheet of the Times. 

' I will now proceed to describe what the nature of the cypher 
is ; and it shall first be introduced to the reader in the words of 
Bacon himself. In the De Augmentis Scientiarum Bacon writes 
thus:* 



*The passage quoted is from the translation by Gilbert Wats, 1640. as 
reproduced in The Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon, at the end of Part I. 



96 



Let us come to Cyphars. Their kinds are many, as Cyphars simple, 
Cyphars intermixt with Nulloes, or Non-significant characters ; Cyphars of 
double letters under one character ; Wheele-cyphars, Kay-cyphars, Cyphars 
of Words, Others. . . . But that jealousies may be taken away, we wiil 
annexe one other invention, which, in truth, we devised in our own youth, 
when we were in Paris : and it is a thing which yet seemeth to us not worthy 
to be lost. It containeth the highest degree of Cypher, which is to signify 
omnia per omnia, yet so as the writng infolding may bear a quintuple relation 
to the writing infolded. No other condition or restriction whatsoever is 
required. It shall be performed thus. First, let all the letters of the 
alphabet, by transposition, be resolved into two letters onely; for the trans- 
position of two letters by five placings will be sufficient for thirty-two differ- 
ences, much more for twenty-four, which is the number of the alphabet. 
The example of such an alphabet is in this wise : 



A 


a a a a a 


I 


a b a a a 


R 


b a a a a 


B 


a a a a b 


K 


ab a a b 


S 


b a a a b 


C 


a a a b a 


L 


a b a b a 


T 


b a a b a 


D 


a a a b b 


M 


abab b 


V 


b a abb 


E 


a a b a a 


N 


a b b aa 


W 


b a b aa 


F 


a a b a b 


O 


abba b 


X 


b ab a b 


G 


a a b b a 


P 


abbba 


Y 


b abba 


H 


aa bb b 


Q 


abbbb 


Z 


babbb 



. . . When you addresse yourself to write, resolve your inward infolded 
letter into this Bi-literarie Alphabet. Say the interior letter be 'Fuge.' 

Example of Solution 

FUGE 
aabab baabb aabba aabaa 

Together with this you must have ready at hand a bi-formed Alphabet, 
which may represent all the letters of the Common Alphabet^ as well Capitall 
Letters as the Smaller Characters, in a double fonne , as may fit every man's 
occasion. 



J a b a b 
\ A Aa a 


abab 


abab 


abab 


abab 


abab 


BBbh 


CCcc 


DDdd 


EEee 


FFff 


i a b a b 


abab 


a b abab 


abab 


abab 


abab 


"\ G Gs-g 


HHh h 


II i i j j 


A^Kk k 


LLll 


M Mmm 


< a b a b 


abab 


abab 


abab 


abab 


abab 


1 NNn n 


OOoo 


PPpp 


QQ q q 


RBrr 


5S s s 


\ abab 


a b a b a b 


abab 


abab 


abab 


abab 


IT Tit 


y Vvv uu 


IVWwxo 


X Xxx 


YYyy 


ZZ z z 



Now to the interior letter which is bi-literate, you shall fit a bi-forraed 
exterior letter, which shall answer the other, letter for letter, and after- 
wards set it downe. Let the exterior example be, Manere te volo, donee 
Venero. 

An Example oj Accotnmodation. 

F U G E 

a abab.baabb. aabba. aabaa 
M an e r e I e v o I o d o n e c v e n [ero'\ 

97 



From this short example Bacon then proceeds to a longer 
one. He takes an entire page from one of Cicero's letters, and 
so prints it in italics from two founts, similar to those in the 
alphabet just given, that it infolds an interior letter from a 
Spartan general, 'Sent once in a scytale, or round cypher'd 
staffe.' The quotation from Cicero it is unnecessary to give 
here. It is sufficient to say that, as printed by Bacon, the ordin- 
ary reader would detect nothing out of the common in it ; but 
when once his eye is made alert by the knowledge that its char- 
acters are drawn from two different founts of type, he can, by 
the aid of the alphabets supplied by Bacon, easily decipher for 
himself the Spartan message infolded in it. 

It is the above passage, occurring in Bacon's own work, 
which has led to the alleged discovery set forth in the volume 
with which we are now dealing ; and the history of the discovery, 
as we there find it, is curious. For a considerable time an 
American student, Dr. Owen, had been working at the elucida- 
tion of another cypher altogether, also alleged to be Bacon's, and 
to exist in the Shakespearian plays. This is the word-cypher. 
With its details we need not here concern ourselves. It is 
enough to say that an American lady, Mrs, Gallup, was his 
assistant. The above passage from Bacon arrested her atten- 
tion, and she became convinced that the Bi-literal Cypher had 
been described by its inventor with special ulterior purpose and 
might possibly be found co-existing in Shakespearian plays with 
the others. She was fortified in this idea by the well known 
and unexplained peculiarities in the printing of the first folio to 
which I have already alluded, and she claims that on examining 
this volume she found her suspicions correct. The result has 
been the book under review. After its publication Mrs. Gallup 
came to England, her sole object being to examine certain rare 
old books which could not be procured in America and find if 
possible the first inception of the cypher writings, and in this she 
claims to have been successful.* Before going farther I will 
direct the reader's attention once again to the bi-literal cypher 
itself, and endeavor to make the nature of it clearer to him 
than it will probably have been made by Bacon's own, somewhat 
clumsy, exposition of it. 

*Published, since this article was written, in the Third Edition of 
Bacon's Bi-literal Cypher. 

98 



In the first place it should be observed that Bacon's own 
name for it — 'bi-literal' — is essentially inaccurate and mislead- 
ing. He means by the word 'bi-literal' that the letters of his 
second alphabet are all formed out of two — that is to say, 'a' and 
'b,' by arranging them variously in so many groups of five. 
But the letters 'a' and 'b,' when used for this purpose, are prop- 
erly speaking not letters at all. They have no phonetic value, 
they are simply arbitrary signs. Their function would be ful- 
filled equally well or better by dots and dashes ( . and — ), or 
else by the longs and shorts (- and o) which are familiar to 
every schoolboy as symbols of prosodical quantity. The cypher 
is a cypher of two signs, not of two letters.- It is, in fact, merely 
a species of Morse Code. Let the reader look back to the bi- 
literal code or alphabet, as formulated by Bacon himself,; and, 
for an example, let him take four letters — a, b, e, and 1 — which 
I choose merely because several different words can be spelt with 
them. He will see that for 'a' the symbol is five Vs (a a a a a), 
for 'b' four 'a's and a 'b' (a a a a b), for *e' two 'a's, a 'b', and 
two 'a's (a a b a a), and for T two consecutive 'a. b's and one 'a' 
(a b a b a). Let him rid himself of these *a's and 'b's, and sub- 
stitute dots and dashes ; let every 'b' be a dash, and every 'a' a 
dot. The result will be just the same, and his mind will most 
likely be clearer. His code signs for these four letters will be as 

follows: A ;B — ;E.. — . . ; L. — . — . Now let 

him write, in this code, 'ale,' 'all,' 'ball,' 'bell,' 'Abel. No exer- 
cise could be easier. 'Ale' will be — . — . . . — . . ; 'All' 

will be — . — . . — . — . ; 'Ball' will be — 

. — . — . . — . — .; 'Bell' will be . . . .— . . — . . . — . — . 

. — . — . ; and 'Abel' will be — . . — . . . — . — . 

Now we come to the next part of our problem. Having writ- 
ten 'ale,' 'all,' 'ball,' 'bell,' and 'Abel' in dots and dashes— 
which constitutes, we will suppose, some message which we wish 
to convey — our next task is to hide this in a series of words with 
which, seemingly, our message shall have no connection. For 
the moment, instead of adopting the precise method of Bacon, 
let us take a much cruder one, which will be at once grasped by 
everybody. Let us make every capital letter signify a dot in our 
code, and every small letter a dash ; and let us arrange the code 
symbols of our five words in a line, thus : 



99 



We have here a series of ninety dots and dashes, and all we 
need now do is to take any sentence we please — any chance 
fragment, whether of prose or poetry — which contains not less 
than ninety letters, and ignoring the ordinary use of small letters 
and capitals, write it in such a way as to put a capital for every 
dot and a small letter for every dash. Let us take, for example, 
the first verses of Gray's 'Elegy,' and write it in this manner. 
What we shall get is as follows : 

THECU RfEwT OUST HEKNE UOfP ArTiN GDAYt 
HELOW InGhE RdWiN DSSLo WLyOE RtHeL EaThE 
PLOUG HMANh OMeWA RdPlO &c. 

All the five words with which we started are here contained 
in our cypher; and the decipherer has only to perform the 
childishly simple task of putting a dot under each capital and a 
dash under each small letter, and he has them back again in the 
form given above. To illustrate the complete independence of 
what Bacon calls the 'infolding' document from the 'infolded,' 
let us set, one under the other, one of Gray's lines, and some dif- 
ferent sets of words altogether. 

THECU RfEwT OUST HEKNE UOfP ArTiN GDAY 
OFMAN SfIrS TDiSO BEDIE NcEaN DtHeF RUIT 
SINGA SoNgO FSiXP ENCEA BaBfU UOfR YEFO (ur)&c. 

Every one of these lines, when resolved into dots and dashes, 
will be the same, and will read thus : 

a I 1 I e I a I | 

/ &c.\ 

V (b) &c./ 

Bacon's system differs from this merely in the fact that, 
instead of using the capitals and the small letters of one ordinary 
alphabet as the equivalents respectively of his 'a's and 'b's — that 
is to say, of his dots and dashes — he uses two italic alphabets, of 
capitals and small letters, complete; both the capitals and small 
'letters of one meaning dots or 'a's, and the capitals and small 

100 



letters of the other meaning dashes or 'b's. Let us now proceed 
to adopt his system a little more nearly ourselves, diverging 
from it only in the fact that our two complete alphabets, instead 
of being two slightly different varieties of italics, shall consist, 
the one of italics and the other of ordinary type, the italics rep- 
resenting the 'a's or dots, the ordinary letters the 'b's or dashes ; 
and we will, as preliminary examples, imagine two cases, parallel 
to that which is alleged to be Bacon's own. The following lines 
are Byron's, which I quote from memory ; and they are printed 
in accordance with the principles just laid down : 

•Sa.inf Feter sat at the celestial gate; 

The keys wer^ rusty, and the lock was dull, 
So little trouble had been given of late. 

Not that the piace by any means was iull, 
But since the Gallic era 'Eighty-eight 

The devils had ta'en a longer, stronger pull. 
And a pull all together, as they say 

At sea, which drew most souls the other way. 

The angels all were singing out of tnne, 

And hoarse with haz/ing little else to do, 
Excepting to wind up the sun and moon. 

And curb a runaway young sta[r or two, &c.] 

To this passage, before examining it, let us add some others 
from Milton, printed in the same manner; and let us imagine, 
for reasons which will appear presently, that we have an edition 
of Milton in which certain passages, and certain passages only — 
those which we shall quote being among them — are printed in 
these two characters, and are consequently at once distinguish- 
able from the rest of the text. 

Of man's first disobedience, and the fruit 
Of that forbidden tree, whos^ mortal taste 
BroMgh^ death into the wot Id and all our wo^. 
With loss of Eden, till ong' greater man 
Restore us, and regain those blissiul seats, 
Sing Heavenly Muse. 

A little onward lend thy guiding hand 

To these dark steps — a little farther on, 

For yonder bank has choice oi sun and shade. 

The SUM to me is dark 
And silent as the moon 
When she deserts the night, 
Hid in h^r vacant interlunar cave. 

' 101 



Yet once wore, oh y^ laurels, and once mor^ 

Ye myrtles brown, and ify never sere, 

I come to pluck your berries liRrsh and crude, 

And with forced fingers rude 

Shatter your leaves, &c., &c. 

Now in the above passages, if we except only the fact that 
the dots and dashes of the cypher are represented in these by 
itaUcs and ordinary letters, whereas Bacon employs two slightly 
different forms of italics, we have the biliteral cypher exempli- 
fied completely, though with extreme simplicity. But we have 
not this only. As the reader will see presently, we have exem- 
plified in them also another of the claims now made for Bacon 
in relation to works published under another name. It may 
amuse some readers to extract the cypher in these passages for 
themselves. They will begin thus, putting dots under the italics 
and dashes under the ordinary letters : 

S at 71 f V eter sat at. 

They will then divide these dots and dashes into groups of 
five, thus : . — ..., — . — ..,. — ...; and on turning to Bacon's 
code, already given, they will find that these three groups mean 
I. W. I. Pursuing this method, they will find that in the passage 
from Byron the following meaning is 'infolded :' 

T, William Wordsworth, am the author of the Byron poems. 
Don Juan contains my private prayers.' 

In the passages from Milton, the 'infolded' meaning is this : 

'I, S. Pepys, in this and oth'r poems [Now to my Sams'n] 
hide my secret frailties [Now to Lycidas] lest my wife, poor 
fool, should know.' 

The reader will see from these examples how easily, if it 
were not for the existence of copyright, any author might repub- 
lish the works of any other, introducing a cypher into them, in 
which he claimed them as his own composition, and deposited 
in them any secrets which he wished both to record and hide. 
The passages taken from Milton illustrate certain farther points. 
The bi-literal cypher of Bacon exists, it is alleged, in the first 
folio of Shakespeare, in those parts only which are printed in 
italics, the end of one fragment of the secret writing often 
breaking off in the middle of a letter, which is completed at the 
beginning of another italic passage farther on, and sometimes 

102 



in another play, ; and parentheses occur Hke those in our imagined 
cypher by Pepys, directing the decipherer where to look for the 
continuations. 

The general character, then, of this biliteral cypher, and the 
manner in which it is alleged to have been inserted in one edition 
of the Shakespearian plays, must now be perfectly clear to even 
the most careless reader; and we may therefore pass on to 
another portion of our subject; for the claim of the Baconian 
theorists does not by any means end with what they declare they 
have proved with regard to the first folio of Shakespeare. They 
claim that the same cypher has been introduced by Bacon into 
early or first editions of a number of other works, some bearing 
his own name, and admittedly written by himself, others bearing 
the name of well known persons, his contemporaries. These 
include his own Advancement of Learning, 1605, his Novum 
Organum, 1620, and his History of Henry VH., 1622 ; the Com- 
plaints, 1 591, and the Colin Clout, 1595, published under the 
name of Spenser, and the edition of the Faerie Queen, 1596 ; cer- 
tain editions of certain plays ascribed to the four dramatists, 
Peele, Greene, Marlowe, and Ben Jonson ; and the edition pub- 
lished in 1628 of The Anatomy of Melancholy. Some of these 
works, in spite of the presence of the cypher in them., it is not 
even claimed that Bacon wrote himself. For example, so we are 
told, he expressly says in his cypher that he used certam plays of 
Ben Jonson, with Ben Jonson's own permission, as a vehicle for 
his secret writing, having had, with the exception of a few short 
masques, no part in the composition of any of them. Bacon does 
claim, however, unless his cypher is altogether an illusion, that 
of many of the works into which the cypher was printed, he was 
himself the actual author — notably The Anatomy of Melan- 
choly, and the whole of the plays called Shakespeare's. On this 
latter point he insists over and over again, declaring that he 
borrowed Shakespeare's name as a pseudonym, and describing 
him as being nothing more than the most accomplished actor of 
his time. 

I say this, let me repeat, on the supposition that the cypher is 
not altogether an illusion. Before considering whether this sup- 
position is correct, let us accept it for the moment as being so, 
and see what are the conclusions which it forces on us. Of the 
four hundred and fifty pages of which Mrs. Gallup's volume. 

103 



The Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon, consists, about three 
hundred and fifty are occupied with what purport to be secrev 
writings of Bacon's, deciphered letter by letter, from the pas- 
sages printed in italics, in certain specified editions of certain 
works, some published under other names, some admittedly his 
own. Of these three hundred and fifty pages of secret writings, 
about fifteen have been extracted from Spenser, Greene, Peele, 
and Marlowe, and twenty-three from Ben Jonson ; about a 
hundred and twenty-five from writings admittedly his own, 
such as the Novum Organum and The New Atlantis, more than 
ninety from Burton, and more than fifty from the first folio of 
Shakespeare. Much more, however, it is averred, remains to be 
deciphered still. 

And now let us ask what, continuing to suppose them 
genuine, these secret writings contain, and why the authoi 
wrote them in such a way. Described generally, they are a 
species of diary, comparable to that of Pepys, also written in 
cypher — a diary to which the author confides thoughts and 
hopes and feelings too intimate to be revealed to contemporaries, 
and secrets the mere hinting of which would have placed his life 
in danger. Of these it is enough for our present purpose to 
mention a few. 

Bacon declares in his cypher over and over again that he was 
not what he appeared to be. He was not, as the world supposed. 
the son of Sir Nicholas Bacon, but the son of the Queen of 
England by a private marriage with Leicester — her eldest son 
and rightful heir to the throne. He was ignorant of the fact till 
he reached his sixteenth year, when he heard the story hinted by 
one of the ladies of the Court. The Queen, in a fit of anger, 
admitted to him that it was true, the marriage having taken 
place secretly in the Tower of London, when the Queen, before 
her accession, and Leicester were both confined there. For 
political reasons it was necessary to keep this a profound secret, 
and the child was confided to Anne and Nicholas Bacon, to be 
brought up as their own and educated as a private person, the 
Queen being determined never, under any circumstances, to 
acknowledge him. To reveal the truth himself would, he 
believed, be to forfeit his life; and hence, smarting under an 
obstinate sense of wrong, he confided his history to the keeping 
of elaborate cyphers, trusting that future students would unravel 

104 



them for a future age. The moment the Queen found that the 
boy had discovered his parentage he was sent to France under 
the care of Sir Amyas Paulet, and did not come back to England 
till the death of his foster-father. When in France he conceived 
an absorbing and romantic passion for Marguerite, wife of 
Henry of Navarre, who returned or pretended to return it. 
Expectations were rife at the time that she and her husband were 
to be divorced ; and Sir Amyas Paulet attempted to arrange with 
Queen Elizabeth that, should the divorce take place, Marguerite 
and Bacon should be married. The divorce, however, was not 
obtained, nor would Queen Elizabeth listen to the proposal. 
This early romance made a profound impression on Bacon, and 
he wrote, long afterwards, Romeo and Juliet in commemoration 
of it. 

Another part of the story which he tells is this. He was not, 
he says, the Queen's only child by Leicester. He had a brother, 
and this brother was Essex; and of all the incidents of his life 
with regard to which he is most anxious to set forth the truth and 
with regard to which he fears that his memory is most likely to 
be wronged, those connected with his conduct towards his unfor- 
tunate brother stand foremost. 

That he does not venture openly to give even a hint of the 
truth with regard to this matter, or his parentage and rightful 
position, he declares with an almost wearisome and not very 
dignified persistence; and he is, he says, driven to hide himself 
in tortuous cyphers, which will keep him safe as a coney hiding 
in a valley of rocks. 

On the contents of the biliteral cypher, considered under 
their more general aspect, we need not dwell longer. Enough 
has been said to show that, if it be a genuine document, the 
author had intelligible reasons for embodying it in this singular 
form. What mainly concerns us here is its purely literary sig- 
nificance, especially as regards the authorship of the so-called 
plays of Shakespeare. The mere fact that this biliteral Baconian 
cypher is incorporated in the first collected edition of these plays 
does not in itself prove, as we have seen already, that Bacon was 
the author of King John and Romeo and Juliet, any more than 
it proves that he was the author of The Fox, which, though the 
same cypher occurs in it, is admitted to be Ben Jonson's. The 
only evidence as to this point with which the biliteral cypher 

105 



supplies us consists not in its existence in an edition of Shake- 
speare's plays, but solely in the assertions which it contains that 
Bacon did actually write them, coupled with further statements 
relating to other cyphers — the word-cypher more particularly, 
also alleged to be contained in them. So far as concerns the 
biliteral cypher itself, the mere assertions as to authorship which 
Bacon makes by means of it have as much or as little value as 
they would have had had he made them openly. Their value 
depends on the value we are inclined to attach to his word, 
coupled with the probabilities of the case as estimated by the 
critic and the historian. The word-cypher, however, stands on 
a different footing. It depends on the text itself, not on the man- 
ner in which the text is printed ; and the author of this cypher 
must necessarily have been the author of the plays. Now the 
biliteral cypher contains, if it really be a genuine document, 
elaborate instructions as to the word-cypher, and directions as to 
the method of unravelling it. That such instructions should be 
given if the word-cypher is a mere illusion, we need hardly say 
is incredible. Hence, according to all rules of common sense, 
our belief in the former carries with it a belief in the latter ; and 
a belief in the latter — the word-cypher — also carries v/ith it the 
further belief that Bacon actually was the author of the Shake- 
spearian plays. 

Whether such be the case or no, it is not my purpose to 
inquire. All that at this moment I am anxious to impress upon 
the reader is the fact that, in taking their stand on this new 
alleged discovery — this discovery of a cypher heretofore not 
dreamed of — a typographical cypher depending on the use of 
two printer's alphabets, nearly alike but yet ascertainably dif- 
ferent, the Baconians have shifted this controversy to wholly 
novel ground. The word-cypher is a cypher which, even those 
who believe in it admit, requires for its interpretation a certain 
amount of conjecture; but the biliteral cypher, if it exists at all, 
can be proved to exist, or, in the opposite case, it can be proved 
to be a mere hallucination, by the aid of a magnifying-glass 
applied to certain printed pages. There is no occasion here for 
any abstruse literary reasoning. There is no occasion for any 
literary reasoning at all. Either certain editions of the various 
books in question — the first folio of Shakespeare being the most 
important and the most famous of them — are, in so far as the 

106 



italicised portions of them are concerned, systematically printed 
in letters from two different founts of type, or they are not. If, 
as is absolutely indisputable, two different founts are used, the 
letters from these founts are used in such a manner that, when 
separated into groups of five, and expressed as dots and dashes, 
each of these groups will denote a single letter, in accordance 
with the code set forth by Bacon himself; or else they will not do 
this, or will do so only by accident, most of the groups having no 
meaning whatsoever. And lastly, if these groups do assume a 
consecutive meaning, and actually give us a series of single let- 
ters, the letters will form words and intelligible sentences, or 
they will not. The whole case is one for simple ocular demon- 
stration. 

To make this demonstration conclusive in the eyes of the 
world generally would, no doubt, demand some time and labour. 
The question is, are there sufficient prima facie grounds for sup- 
posing that possibly the Baconian theory is true, to make it 
worth while for sceptics to undertake the inquiry ? For my own 
part, unhesitatingly I venture to say that there are. In the first 
place, this cypher, as no one can deny, was familiar to Bacon, 
who claims to have himself invented it. He has himself admit- 
tedly supplied us with our specimen page of it, a passage from 
Cicero, reproduced by Mrs. Gallup in photographic facsimile, 
together with a companion page, in which Bacon has placed side 
by side the two alphabets employed, so that the differences 
between their respective letters may be more easily realised. 
Thus the biliteral cypher exists in one page of Bacon's works at 
all events. There is nothing, therefore, fantastic in the idea 
that it may exist elsewhere. The only possibility of any doubt 
with regard to the question is due altogether to a purely physical 
circumstance. The types employed in printing the specimen 
passage from Cicero were designedly made of such a size, and 
the differences between the two alphabets were accentuated in 
such a manner, that the ordinary eye could readily learn to dis- 
tinguish the letters that stand for dashes from, those that stand 
tor dots. Even here, however, the differences are for the most 
part so small and delicate that, in order to perceive them, we 
must scrutinise the page attentively ; and an hour of such atten- 
tion may elapse before we cease to be puzzled. But in the first 
folio of Shakespeare, as in most of the other volumes in which it 

107 



is contended that the same type occurs, the type is much smaller. 
Although even the naked eye can be soon trained to perceive 
that in many cases the letters belong to different founts, yet these 
differences are of so minute a kind that in other cases they elude 
the eye without the aid of a magnifying-glass ; and even with the 
aid of a magnifying-glass — I say this from experience — the eye 
of the amateur, at all events, remains doubtful, and unable to 
assign the letters to this alphabet or to that. The majority of edu • 
cated persons, therefore, in the present state of the controversy, 
if they give to the italicised passages of the first Shakespearian 
folio and the other books in question only so much time and 
attention as may be expected from interested amateurs, may 
reasonably, if not rightly, entertain the opinion that the larger 
part of the differences alleged to exist between the italic letters 
employed are entirely imaginary, since their eyes are unable to 
detect them ; that the supposed cypher is altogether a delusion, 
and has been read into the texts, not out of them, by Mrs. Gal- 
lup and her coadjutors. 

On the other hand, the fact that the amateur finds himself, 
after weeks of study, still completely bewildered in his attempt 
to allocate the various letters to two different founts of type, in 
such a way as to elicit a sentence or even a word in groups of 
dots and dashes, according to the Baconian code, must not be 
taken too hastily as a proof that the alleged cypher is imagin- 
ary. Mrs. Gallup has done much, though not so much as she 
might have done, to enable her readers to settle this point for 
themselves. She has reproduced in facsimile from the original 
editions Bacon's preface to the Novum Orgamim, 1620; and the 
Epistle Dedicatory of the so-called Spenser's Complaints, 1591, 
in both of which it is contended that the Baconian cypher occurs. 
She gives similar facsimiles also of the Epistle Dedicatory, and 
the Commendatory Verses prefixed to the first folio of Shake- 
speare. She gives also an enlarged diagram of the different 
forms of italics used by Bacon in the printing of the Novum 
Organum; and of his preface to that work, and of the Epistle 
Dedicatory of Spenser's Complaints, she gives the cypher mean- 
ing extracted letter by letter, each italic being thus allocated to 
its own alleged fount. Is this allocation merely fanciful or not ? 

I have studied for some weeks Mrs. Gallup's facsimilies my- 
self, and I give my experience, purely as that of an amateur, 

108 



for what it is worth. When I examined the facsimiles first I 
could make nothing out of them ; and of those from the first folio 
I can make very little still. All the letters seemed too much 
alike to allow of my separating them systematically into two 
founts of type. Differences which I thought I had discovered 
at one moment altogether vanished the next, and gave place to 
others, which soon, in their turn, escaped me. But with regard 
to the facsimiles from the Novum Organum and Spenser's Com- 
plaints the case was otherwise, and for a very simple reason. In 
the facsimiles from the folio the type is extremely small, the 
original page having been reduced so as to accommodate it to an 
octavo volume. But in the Bacon and Spenser facsimiles the 
type is of the size of the original. It is comparatively large, and 
a study of it is proportionately easier. In these pages I was very 
soon able to distmguish the different founts to which several of 
the letters belong. I could presently do the same with regard 
to several letters more ; atid at last I was more or less master of 
two-thirds of the alphabet in such a way that I was able, with 
some confidence, to translate them, when in one form into a dot. 
and when in another form into a dash. I have tried this experi- 
ment with a large number of passages, and, comparing my inter- 
pretations with that of Mrs. Gallup herself, I have found that it 
coincides with hers, sometimes in four cases out of seven, and 
not infrequently in five. Many of the letters still continued to 
baffle me; but with regard to some I found myself always right ; 
and the dots or dashes into which I had resolved these have 
invariably coincided with the requirements of the cypher, as 
Mrs. Gallup interprets it. It appears to me to be almost incon- 
ceivable that multiplied coincidences such as these can be the 
work of chance, or that they can originate otherwise than in the 
fact that in these pages at all events — the preface to the Novum 
Orgamun, printed in 1620. and in the Dedication of Spenser s 
Complaints, printed in 1591 — a biliteral cypher exists, in both 
cases the work of Bacon; and if such a cypher really exists 
here, the probabilities are overwhelming that Mrs. Gallup is 
right, and that we shall find it existing in the first folio of 
Shakespeare also. 

It is unfortunate that Mrs. Gallup, whilst giving us the fac- 
similes already mentioned, has not given us any from the Shake- 
spearian plays themselves, together with specimens of the cypher 

109 



in them, interpreted letter by letter. I doubt, however, if such 
facsimiles would be conclusive if the page of the original folia 
were reduced to the size of an octavo. The process which ought 
to be adopted is one entirely the reverse of this. Passages from 
the first folio should be given not in a reduced but in an en- 
larged facsimile, so that the letters should, if possible, be some- 
thing like half an inch high. Copies, moreover, of the letters, 
in all the forms in which they occur, should be arranged side by 
side in alphabets, according to the founts to which they belong ; 
and a very few passages, if enlarged and illustrated thus, would 
be sufficient to show whether the admitted peculiarities of the 
type are merely accidental, as has vaguely been assumed hitherto, 
or are really the vehicle of an elaborately arranged cypher. 

In order to show the reader that Bacon's biliteral cypher can 
easily be printed in such a way that the inexperienced eye would 
wholly fail to detect it, and the uninstructed critic would reject 
its existence as a myth, I subjoin a pas'sage taken from Bacon's 
own chapter on cyphers : 

Neither is it a small thing these cypher characters hare, and tnay 'per/orme. 
For by this Art a xoay is opened whereby a vian may exinesse and signifie 
the intentions of his minde at any distance of place, by objects ivhich may be 
presented to his eye ande accommodated to the eare provided those objects be 
capable of a twofold difference only, as by bells, by trumpets, by lights, by 
torches, by the report of muskets, and by any instruments of like nature. But 
to pursue our enterprise when .... 

Into this passage I have printed the following lines in 
cypher : 

The star of Shakespeare pales ; but, brighter far, 
Burns, through the dusk he leaves, an ampler star. 

Founts of italic type might be found the differences between 
which would be much more minute than those existing between 
the two used here, but which would yet be visible to the trained 
eye of a printer's reader, and by means of which a cypher might 
be printed quite legible to the expert, but undistinguishable for 
all the world besides. If, therefore, a biliteral Bacon's cypher 
does really exist in the first folio of Shakespeare, we must be pre- 
pared to find that the unravelling of it is a matter of considerable 
difficulty, and that the ocular evidences of its existence are a long 
time in becoming plain to us. 

110 



I must now draw attention to another aspect of the question. 
If the cypher does not really exist, the entire matter, amounting 
to between three and four hundred pages, which Mrs. Gallup 
professes to have deciphered, is an elaborate literary forgery. 
I recommend the reader to study these pages, and ask if their 
character is such as to suggest this conclusion. I can here quote 
one passage only, which is alleged to liave been printed, not 
into the Shakespearian folio, but into the Neu^ Atlantis. It 
refers to the writer's supposed early love affair. If it be a for- 
gery, it is one of extraordinary ingenuity ; so full does it seem 
to me of pathetic and dignified beauty, and so strongly does it 
bear the marks of genuine and acute sincerity. 

Th' fame of th' gay French Court had come to me even then, and it was 
flattering to th' youthfull and most natural! love o' th' affaires taking us from 
my native lanJ, insomuch as th' secret commission had been entrusted to me, 
which required most true wisdome for safer, speedier conduct then 'twould 
have if left to th' common course of businesse. Soe with much interessed, 
though sometimes apprehensive minde, I made myself ready to accompany 
Sir Amyias to that sunny land o' th' South I learned so supremely to love, 
that afterwards I would have left England and every hope of advancement, 
to remain my whole life there. Nor yet could this be due to th' delight of 
th' country by itselfe; for love o' sweete Marguerite, th' beautifull young 
sister o' th' king (married to gallant Henry th' King o' Navarre) did make 
it Eden to my innocent heart ; and even when I learned her perfidie, love did 
keepe her like th' angels in my thoughts half o' th' time — as to th' other 
half she was devilish, and I myselfe was plung'd into hell. This lasted 
duri'g many yeares, and, not until four decades or eight lustres o' my life 
were outliv'd, did I take any other to my sore heart. Then I married th' 
woman who hath put Marguerite from my memorie — rather I should say 
hath banished her portrait to th' walles of memorie only, where it doth hang 
in th' pure undimmed beauty of those early dayes. 

W. H. MAI.LOCK. 



Ill 



THE NEW SHAKESPEAKE-BACON CONTEOVEKSY. 

By Gakrett P. Serviss. 

The Cosmopolitan, ISTew York, March, 1902. 

That smoldering question which nothing seems able to 
extinguish, "Did Shakespeare write the Shakespeare plays ?" 
and the related question, "Is there a cipher hidden in those 
plays, which not only reveals their real authorship but betrays 
important state secrets of the time of Queen Elizabeth ?" have 
just been brought before the public mind in a new and start- 
ling aspect. 

And this time the problem is presented in a form which 
renders it capable of being submitted to something like a scien- 
tific test. It is, in fact, put upon a mechanical basis, so that 
it becomes a mere question of distinguishing between different 
shapes of printers' types. 

Mrs. Elizabeth W. Gallup, of Detroit, Michigan, avers 
that while engaged in an examination of old editions of the 
works of Francis Bacon, trying to trace there a "Cipher Story," 
the key to which was discovered by Dr. O. W. Owen, to whom 
she was acting as an assistant, she became convinced that the 
careful explanation which Bacon has given in his celebrated 
work, De Augmentis Scientiarum, of a species of secret writ- 
ing, invented by him, and which he calls a "Bi-literal Cipher," 
was intended to serve some other purpose besides that of a 
mere treatise on the subject. 

This Cipher is based upon the use of two slightly different 
fonts of type and, as we shall presently see, has nothing what- 
ever to do with the literary form or sense of the books in which 
it is alleged to be concealed. 

Remembering those puzzling italicized passages that occur 
in the First Folio edition of Shakespeare's Plays, published in 
1623, and for which no satisfactory explanation has ever been 

112 



offered, Mrs. Gallup immediately examined them to see if, 
perchance, the bi-literal cipher described hy Bacon might not 
be found in them. Apparently she was not confident of suc- 
cess, but, to her great surprise, as she affirms, the cipher was 
there ! 

She began to read it out, and if the story of what she says 
she found is true, nobody can wonder that she felt she had 
made the literary discovery of the age. 

Let us say at once that it is not only in the Shakespeare 
Plays that the alleged cipher is hidden, but it appears also in 
the works that were published under Bacon's own name, being 
confined, as in the plays, to the italicized portions — italicized 
for no discoverable reason — and also, surprising to relate, in 
a variety of other books of the Elizabethan period, such as 
Spenser's Shepherd's Calendar and Faerie Queene, Burton's 
Anatomy oi Melancholy, the plays of Peele, Greene and 
Marlowe, and even some parts of the plays of Ben Jonson. 

Through all of these works, according to Mrs. Gallup, 
who has just filled a large octavo volume with her asserted 
revelations, runs a story, composed by Francis Bacon, and 
repeated over and over again, in varying, but never contra- 
dictory, forms, in which he affirms that he was the son of 
Queen Elizabeth by Robert Dudley, the Earl of Leicester, to 
whom she was secretly married in the Tower of London when 
before her accession to the throne, both she and the Earl were 
imprisoned there; that, in order to keep his birth secret, he 
was given, while a child, to Sir Nicholas Bacon and his wife 
Anne, who brought him up as if he were their own son; that 
he did not discover the truth about his birth until he was six- 
teen years old, when an intimation of it reached his ears 
through the indiscretion of a lady of the court, and then his 
mother, the Queen, in a fit of passion, confessed the truth to 
him, and immediately afterward sent him away to Erance in 
charge of Sir Amyas Paulet ; and that while he was in southern 
France he fell in love with Marguerite, the beautiful wife of 
King Henry of N^avarre, and the play of Romeo and Juliet 
was afterward based upon this romantic episode in his life. 
In other parts of the story Bacon is represented as affirming 
that Queen Elizabeth had another son from her secret union 

113 



with the Earl of Leicester, this being no less a person than the 
Earl of Essex, who was afterward executed for liigh treason 
by his mother's command. Essex was thus, according to the 
storj, Bacon's younger brother, and, in the Cipher, Bacon 
appears as constantly lamenting the share which he unwill- 
ingly had in the tragic fate of his brother. 

This story, whether it truly exists in the alleged Cipher 
or is the product of imagination, cannot fail to hold the 
reader's attention, but before pursuing it farther let us see 
what the Bi-literal Cipher is. 

In his work, De Augmentis Scientiarum, Bacon first 
shows that a cipher alphabet can be formed by various trans- 
positions of the two leading letters of the ordinary alphabet, 
a and b, in sets of five, each set representing one letter of the 
Cipher, thus: 

Such an alphabet in itself would be of no use for secret 
writing. For instance, let us print the word "Bacon" in it. 
It would run: aaaab, aaaaa, aaaba, abbab, abbaa. If a series 
of sentences were written, or printed, in that manner it is 
evident that the merest tyro would quickly discover the key 
and decipher the message. 

Bacon's next step, then, is to contrive a way in which the 
alphabet above- described can be "infolded" in a printed book 
so that each set of five successive letters composing the words 
of the book, without changing their order and without refer- 
ence to the meaning that they convey to the ordinary reader, 
shall represent one of the letters of the hidden Cipher. For 
this purpose it is necessary to employ two fonts of type, in 
which the forms of the letters slightly differ. Call one the 
"a font" and the other the "b font;" then every letter in the 
"a font" will stand for "a" in making up the sets of fivr| 
a's and b's that compose the letters of the cipher alphabet, and 
similarly every letter of the b-font will stand for "b." 



Note: An cxtcw^cd illustration of the working out of the cipher is 
omitted here, the manner of it being fully illustrated in tzvo other 
parts of the volume. 

114 



Thus, by simply printing three sentences, containing one 
hundred and twenty-five letters in two kinds of type, another 
entirely different sentence, containing only twenty-five letters, 
is inclosed in them, and can be read only by one who holds 
the clue to the double system of types, which Bacon calls a 
Bi- literal Cipher. It is not necessary in any manner to inter- 
fere with the order of the words in the original work, and any 
book in existence could be made to hold a cipher of this kind. 
The only restriction upon the proceedings of the person who 
inserts the cipher is imposed by the necessity of using up 
five letters of the original for every one letter of his inclosed 
cipher. 

In Bacon's alleged use of the Cipher he is said to have 
included it only in the italicized portions of the books wherein 
it is found, using two fonts of Italic letters. 

]^ow, even if the existence of such a Cipher in the Folio 
Edition of Shakespeare's Plays, whose typographical eccen- 
tricities have long been a puzzle, can be established, that fact 
would not in itself affect the question of the authorship of 
the Plays. Being simply a matter of the types employed, any 
printer, if he had the opportunity — not to speak of a suffi- 
cient motive — could have inserted the story which Mrs. Gallup 
professes to have extracted. 

Of course Bacon himself could, thus have inserted it with- 
out having had anything to do with the original composition 
of the Plays. In fact, however, he claims in the alleged Cipher 
Story that he was the real author of those immortal composi- 
tions, as well as of other books, such as Spenser's Faerie 
Queene and Marlowe's plays. 

But the reader is likely to say: "This is so simple a 
matter that it should have been cleared up long ago. If there 
are two kinds of type used in the Folio Edition of Shake- 
speare's Plays, and if all the italicized portions are printed 
in that manner, and filled with a secret story, it ought to be 
the easiest thing in the world to establish the fact by simple 
examination." So it would be if the fonts of type alleged to 
have been employed by Bacon were as clearly distinguished 
from one another as are those which he used in illustrating 
the principle of the Bi-literal Cipher in his De Augmentis, or 



115 



those which we have selected for a similar purpose. But, in 
fact, there is no such clear distinction. It may indeed be said 
that Bacon would have defeated his own end by making the 
differences of type manifest at the first glance. He had to 
choose letters which should be so nearly alike that they would 
pass under the ordinary reader's eyes without exciting suspi- 
cion, and yet should be sufficiently varied to be distinguished 
without too great difficulty when at last the key was discovered 
and the deciphering begun. 

Not only are the differences admitted by Mrs. Gallup, 
especially in the case of the small characters, to be so slight 
that very close examination is required to preceive them, but 
she avers that Bacon was not satisfied with using only two 
fonts; he employed many different fonts, and sometimes 
changed the order of their distribution among the "A's" and 
"B's," apparently for the purpose of more surely concealing 
his cipher, for he is represented as saying that his life would 
be in danger if the fact became known that he was using this 
method of handing down to posterity secrets concerning the 
highest personages in the State which the few who were ac- 
quainted with them dared not whisper above their breath. 

As Mr. Mallock has suggested, the thing to do is not to 
photograph the pages said to contain the cipher down to the 
dimensions of an octavo, as has been done, but to magnify 
them, in order that the typographical variations may be made 
more evident. By adopting that plan it may be possible to 
submit the whole question to a decisive test. At any rate, it 
is a question that can be tested by a mechanical examination, 
and there certainly seems to be no occasion for the display of 
heat and bad temper that has been called forth in some quarters 
by the discussion. On the contrary, it is full of interest, which- 
ever way it may be decided. 

Returning to the revelations which Mrs. Gallup assures 
us have been extracted from the books named with the aid of 
the Bi-literal Cipher, we come upon another point more sur- 
prising still. The Bi-literal Cipher is believed by her to have 
been intended as a key to other, more difficult, forms of cipher 
embedded by Bacon in his various works. The most im- 
portant of these is described as a "word-cipher," the transla- 
tion of which does not depend upon the use of any special 

116 



type, but is to be effected by means of certain key-words and 
directions given in the Bi-literal Cipher. This Word-Cipher, 
if it exists, could not have been inserted in a v^ork originally 
composed without reference to it, but could only be worked 
into the web and woof of the composition by the original 
author, and to assert, as the story does, that Bacon was able 
to compose the finest plays that we know under the name of 
Shakespeare merely as cloaks for other hidden plays and nar- 
ratives is indeed to tax credulity to its limit. 

It will be observed that the "word-cipher" does not 
admit of any such mechanical test as can be applied to the 
Bi-literal Cipher, but is a subject for choice, judgment and 
ingenuity in interpretation, so that, to anybody not predis- 
posed to accept it, it can never appeal with convincing force, 
as the Bi-literal would do if once the typographical differences 
on which it is based could be completely established. Let the 
Bi-literal Cipher's presence be demonstrated beyond a perad- 
venture, and then the word-cipher would stand a better chance 
of acceptance, because the other asserts its existence. The 
word-cipher compels those who accept it to believe that the 
person, who put the ciphers in Shakespeare's plays and Bacon's 
learned treatises and the poems and dramatic compositions of 
Marlowe, Spenser, Peele and Greene and the Anatomy of 
Melancholy called Burton's, actually produced all of those 
works. 

Using the Word-Cipher, and following the clues accorded 
by the Bi-literal, Mrs. Gallup has recently deciphered, as she 
avers, one of the concealed tragedies of Bacon. It is called 
The Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, and is made up of bits from 
many of Shakespeare's plays, matched together. For in- 
stance, we find Romeo's words put into the mouth of King 
Henry VIII, and applied by him to Anne Boleyn: 

"O she doth teach the torches to burn bright! 
It seems she hangs upon the cheek of night 
As a rich jewel in an Ethiop's ear; 
Beauty too rich for use, for earth too dear!" 

All this is well calculated to repel dispassionate investi- 
gation of Mrs. Gallup's claims because it so far offends the 
common sense and judgment of the reader that he must be 

117 



tempted to throw the whole thing overboard at once. If the 
alleged discovery can ever be rendered acceptable to unpreju- 
diced investigation, it must be on the basis of the Bi-literal 
Cipher alone. Let Mrs. Gallup successfully meet Mr. Mal- 
lock's challenge by taking, as he suggests, the epistle from 
Macbeth to Lady Macbeth (Macbeth, Act. I, Scene 5), which 
is one of the passages in the first Folio printed in Italics, and 
indicating under each letter the font to which, according to 
her interpretation, it belongs. Then let Mr. Mallock have the 
passage photographically enlarged, so that the dullest eye 
can detect the smallest differences in the letters, and when 
the result is printed the public will have a fair chance to judge 
for itself. 

But, whatever the outcome of the discussion aroused by 
Mrs. Gallup's book may be, the story that Francis Bacon 
appears to tell in its pages does not fail in interest. The well- 
known fact that historical rumor has long whispered hints 
touching many of his alleged revelations serves to draw atten- 
tion to them. Some of Mrs. Gallup's critics intimate that those 
rumors may really be the sole foundation of her decipherings. 
But they do not accuse her of wilful invention, and if she has 
dreamed these things it must be admitted that she dreams 
interestingly. 

Listen to Bacon's complaint of the injustice done him, 
as Mrs. Gallup says she reads it in the double types of the 
Advancement of Learning" : 

"Queen Elizabeth, the late soveraigne, wedded, secretly, 
th' Earle, my father, at th' Tower of London, and afterwards 

at th' house of Lord P this ceremony was repeated, but 

not with any of the pompe and ceremonie that sorteth wel 
with queenly espousals, yet with a sufficient number of 
witnesses. 

"I therfore, being the first borne sonne of this union 
should sit upon the throne, ruling the people over whom the 
Supreame Soveraigne doth shewe my right, as hath beene said, 
whilst suff'ring others to keepe the royall power. 

"A foxe, seen oft at our Court in th' forme and outward 
appearance of a man, named Robert Cecill — the hunchback — 
must answer at th' Divine Araignment to my charge agains' 

118 



him, for he despoyled me ruthlessly. Th' Queene, my mother, 
might in course of events which follow'd their revelations 
regarding my birth and parentage, without doubt having some 
naturall pride in her offspring, often have shewne us no little 
attenntiou had not the crafty foxe aroused in that tiger-like 
spiritt th' jealousy that did so tormente the Queene [that] 
neyther night nor day brought her respite from such suggestio's 
about my hope that I might bee England's King. 

"He told her my endeavours were all for sov'raigntie and 
honour, a perpetuall intending and constant hourlie practising 
some one thing urged or imposed, it should seeme, by that 
absolute, inhere't, honorably deriv'd necessitie of a conserva- 
tion of roiail dignity. 

"He bade her observe the strength, breadth and com- 
passe, at an early age, of th' intellectual powers I displaied, 
and ev'n deprecated th' gen'rous disposition or graces of speech 
which wonne me manie friends, implying that my gifts would 
thus, no. doubt, uproot her, because I would, like Absalom, 
steale awaie th' people's harts and usurp the throne whilst my 
mother was yet alive." 

Bacon appears also as frequently lamenting the tragic 
death of his (alleged) brother Robert, Earl of Essex, and in 
King Lear Mrs. Gallup reads from the Bi-literal Cipher a 
statement that Essex's life might have been saved if a signet- 
ring that he desired to have presented to his mother had reached 
her: "As hee had beene led to bel'eve he had but to send the 
ring to her and th' same would at a mome't's warni'g bring 
rescue or reliefe, he relyed vainly, alas ! on this promis'd ayde. 
... It shal bee well depicted in a play, and you wil be in- 
structted to discypher it fully." 

In Ben Jonson's Masques, Mrs. Gallup says, she finds 
among other things this statement in Bacon's Bi-literal Cipher: 

"The next volume will be under W. Shakespeare's name. 
As some which have now been produced have borne upon the 
title-page his name though all are my owne work, I have 
allow'd it to stand on manie others which I myselfe regard 
as equal in merite. When I have assum'd men's names, th' 
next step is to create for each a stile naturall to th' man that 

119 



yet should [let] my owne bee seene, as a thrid o' warpe in 
my entire fabrieke soe that it may be all mine." 

In the same work Bacon is represented as saying that 
Spenser, Greene, Peele and Marlowe have sold him their 
names. This, it would appear, was not the case with Ben 
Jonson, of whom he speaks as his friend, and the implication 
is that Jonson knew what Bacon was doing with regard to 
the others. 

Several times Bacon is made to refer to the murder of 
Amy Robsart, the Earl of Leicester's wife, of whom he inti- 
mates, as rumor has long done, that the Earl wished to rid 
himself in order to marry Elizabeth. 

The stories of his royal birth, of his love for Marguerite 
of Navarre, and all the rest of the tale are repeated again and 
again from the various books in which the Cipher is said to 
lie. Frequently Bacon appeals to the unknown decipherer 
whom he trusts some future time to produce, urging him to 
spare no pains to unearth the hidden things and promising 
him undying fame for his labor. 

Among other things alleged to be contained in Bacon's 
Ciphers are translations of Homer and of Virgil, part of 
which, in resounding blank verse, Mrs. Gallup publishes in her 
book. And some of her critics aver that it bears evidence of 
having been based upon Pope's translation of the Iliads 
because it contains names and descriptions that Pope intro- 
duced without any warrant from Homer. 

It is strongly urged by some of Mrs. Gallup's critics that 
if Bacon wished to tell such a story as is here put in his mouth 
he would never have done it in so cumbrous a fashion, but 
would simply have written it down and placed it under seal, 
in trustworthy hands, to be opened and read by posterity. 
But if, in spite of such objections, the existence of the Cipher 
should be proved, the question would then arise: "Who did 
put it there, if Bacon didn't, and for what end ?" 



120 



PROS AND CONS OF THE CONTROVERSY 



THE BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF SIR FRANCIS BACOK 

Baconiana, London. 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 

Editor Baconiania: 

From reading the January number of the Magazine, it 
would seem that I had at least furnished a new topic for 
discussion, and given a new impetus to the study of things 
Baconian, in the discovery that the Bi-literal Cipher of Francis 
Bacon was incorporated in the printing of his works, and that 
a secret story of the great Author was hidden in them. This 
in itself is a distinct gain for the study had seemed to lan- 
guish for material upon which to feed until the opening of 
new channels of thought and research and comparison of ideas 
upon the new discovery. The object of the Society is investi- 
gation, First: of Bacon's authorship of a much wider range 
of literature than has been accredited to him upon the title 
pages of the books of his time. Secondly: many have believed 
that Ciphers would be found that would present new phases 
of his life history which has seemed so mysterious, if only 
the right "key" could be touched. The limits of novelty in 
the discussion of all these things seemed to have been reached, 
however. Paralellisms in philosophy, language and thought 
had been urged until variety of phrases had been exhausted 
in comparing them, yet all arguments, while morally conclu- 
sive to the party urging them, were tinged with inconclusive- 
ness in the lack of physical demonstration. The Ciphers 
found furnish the missing links which explain much, if not all. 

iNTaturally the Ciphers and what they tell invite investi- 
gation and the pages of Baconiania would seem a not inap- 
propriate forum for their discussion. 

The understandings of different individuals concerning 
the same subject are almost as varied as the individuals them- 
selves, hence we must expect a variety of opinions. Con- 

122 



course of words lias such different meanings to different people 
that we are compelled to believe that the brain is like a pListlc 
matter of varying degrees of hardness, receiving but the faintest 
impression, or none, of some things, while others are deeply 
imprinted upon the recording tablets of memory. Then, too, 
the sources of information are so varied that the results of 
studying them are like looking through glasses of differing color 
and focus, and the individual receives and describes the im- 
pression from their own particular lense and confidently asserts 
that to be the only truth, hence investigation, comparison and 
discussion are needful in the clarifying process. 

Investigation, however, does not mean rejection of that 
which is new or unpleasant or not in accord with our precon- 
ceived ideas, else my own labors upon old books would have 
stopped years ago, and I should not now be engaged in explain- 
ing what I have found, and the old beliefs would not have 
suffered the jar of a "Cipher discovery". 

Fully conscious of the absolute veracity of the work I 
have done, and my responsibility in the expression, I knoiv 
that the Bi-literal Cipher exists in the printing of Bacon's 
works: I hnoir that others can follow over the same course, 
if they have the aptitude and patience for it, and can reach 
no other correct results. To those who have availed themselves 
of the opportunity carefully to study and follow my work, no 
argument is needed to convince them of my assertion. Doubts 
and objections come from those who have not had that oppor- 
tunity or have given the work but slight attention. 

There are those who seem to think the deciphered work 
as published is a creation of my own, — or that I am self- 
deceived. They do me too much honor, — or too little. It is 
an honor to be thought capable of such a production, through 
the gathering of historical facts, aided by a romantic imagina- 
tion, and the power to express it all in the pure old English 
langmage of Francis Bacon. Did I possess such creative powers 
I would have devoted them to some more popular theme and 
spared eyes and brain from the nervous exhaustion of exam- 
ining seven thousand pages of old English printing for the 
peculiarities of the Italic letters in them. I cannot aspire to 
the honor of such a "creation." 



123 



On the other hand, it is not complimentary to my judg- 
ment, or that of my publishers, that I, or they, should go 
through the constant researches of the last seven years in 
libraries so widely scattered, — self deceived as to the resulting 
work, expending so much of time and strength and substance 
in developing something that was non-existent; — or if not 
that — and the Cipher has no reason for existence — what shall 
be said of so stupendous and brain-racking effort to deceive 
my readers with so purposeless a production. 

It is urged that the Cipher disclosures do not accord with 
history. This is a field for the investigators. I can only record 
what I find as I find it. "The facts of history" is an elastic 
term and the deductions drawn from public records of the 
earlier ages vary greatly. The conviction is growing that much 
of interest was not recorded and it is certain that sources of 
information are too diverse and greatly scattered to be all 
brought together into an exact statement of facts. If the 
Cipher had a purpose, it was to record that which was being 
suppressed. It would have been a work of supererogation to 
put into Cipher the open records of the day. 

Many inquiries have reached me asking "How is the 
Cipher worked ?" and expressing disappointment that the 
v^^riter had been unable after some hours of study, to grasp the 
system or its application. 

It would be difiicult, and hardly to be expected that an 
understanding of Greek or Sanscrit could be reached with the 
aid of a few written lines or with a few hours study. It is 
equally so with the Cipher. Deciphering the Bi-literal Cipher 
as it appears in Bacon's works will be impossible to those who 
are not possessed of an eyesight of the keenest and perfect 
accuracy of vision in distinguishing minute differences in 
form, lines, angles and curves in the printed letters. Other, 
things absolutely essential are unlimited time and patience, 
and aptitude, love for overcoming puzzling difficulties and, 
I sometimes think, inspiraiion. As not every one can be a 
poet, an artist, an astronomer or adept in other branches re- 
quiring special aptitude, so, and for the same reasons, not every 
one will be able to master the intricacies of the Cipher, for, 
in many ways it is most intricate and puzzling, not in the 



124 



system itself, but in its application, as it is found in the old 
books. It must not be made too plain, lest it be discovered 
too quickly, nor hid too deep lest it never see the light of day, 
is the substance of the thought of the inventor, many times 
repeated in th£ work. The system has been recognized since 
the first publication of De Augmentis, but the ages since have 
waited to learn of its application to Bacon's works ; and yet the 
idea seems to be prevalent that "any one" should be able to 
do the work, once the bi-literal alphabet is known. This is 
as great a mistake as it would be tO' reject the translations of 
the character writings and hieroglyphics of older times which 
have been deciphered because we could not in a few hours 
master them ourselves. Ciphers are used to hide tilings, not to 
make them clear. 



125 



BI-LITERAL CYPHER OF FRA^^CIS BACOX. 

A REPLY TO CERTAIN CRITICS. 
by elizabeth wells gallup. 

Pall Mall Magazine, May, 1902. 

To the March number of the Pall Mall Magazine Mrs. Gallup con- 
tributeU a preliminary paper on the controversy which has so stirred 
the literary world. We now place before our readers a second article 
in which Mrs. Gallup deals specifically with a number of points which 
have been raised by certain individual writers during the progress of 
the controversy. This Mrs. Gallup has not been able to do before, 
because, as we have already stated, the criticisms were not in her pos- 
session when her first contribution left America, hi sending us her 
second contribution Mrs. Gallup wishes us to point out that the art- 
icles to which she is now replying occupied considerable space in the 
magazines publishing them, and the answers, to be at all full and cor- 
respondingly valuable, require much greater space than was placed at 
her disposal by the Pall Mall Magazine. In fairness to Mrs. Gallup 
we think it right to precede her paper with this explanation. 

Ed. P. M. M. 

I gladly avail myself of the opportunity of replying to some 
of my critics in the Pall Mall Magazine, as discussions in 
the daily press sometimes become acrimonious and detrimental 
to real study and calm judgment, while a presentation of the 
subject in the pages of a fireside companion can be enjoyed in 
the hours of leisure and recreation. 

In view of the remarkable expressions in the Times and 
other papers, and in two or three magazines in England, I 
should perhaps regard myseK fortunate that there is now no In- 
quisition to compel a discoverer to recant, under penalty of the 
rack; and I can already sympathise with a contemporary of 
Bacon who, when forced publicly to deny what he knew to be 
truth, was said to have muttered, as he withdrew, "E i^ur si 
muove !" 

The torrent of questions, objections, suggestions, inferen- 
ces, and imaginings that have overwhelmed the press over 
Bacon's Bi-literal Cypher, has shown an astonishing interest in 

126 



the subject, and I may congratulate myself, at any rate, upon 
being the innocent cause of what somebody has called a "tremen- 
dous propulsion of thought currents." Much of this energy 
has been expended along lines in no way relating to me or the 
validity of my -work, but we may suppose there is "no exercise 
of brain force without its value," and in the swirl there may be 
others who will say with me, "the world does move." 

I had expected, if not hoped, that with the aids I had set out, 
some adept in ciphers — sufficiently curious to enjoy solving 
Sphinxlike riddles — would have followed, and so proved my 
work. I have been surprised to find how few have been able to 
grasp the system of its application, and how much defective 
Vision affects the judgment. I also regret very seriously the 
superficiality of most of the investigations. I am therefore 
obliged to go into details, when I had expected eager research by 
others would have made it a fascinating race to forestall me in 
deciphering the old books I was unable to obtain. 

Ten Objections in the "Times." 

"A Correspondent," in the Times, fully discusses and sets 
out objections, summarising them finally under the following 
ten heads: 

1. "There are discernible distinct differences of form in 
certain individual Italic letters used by printers of the period." 

This is an important admission of one important fact. 
Less careful investigators have directly, or by inference, denied 
that any such discernible differences exist at all. In the Bi- 
literal Cypher, p. 310, Bacon says: "Where, by a slighte altera- 
tion of the common Italicke letters, the alphabets of a bi-literate 
cypher having the two forms are readily obtain'd," etc., which 
states clearly enough that he had few changes to make to secure 
his double alphabet. 

It is admitted also that the full explanation of the bi-literal 
cipher is given in De Augmentis Scientiarum. Gilbert Wats's 
translation says: "Together with this, you must have ready at 
hand a Bi-formed Alphabet, which may represent all the Letters 
of the common Alphabet, as well Capitall Letters as the Smaller 
Characters in double forme, as may fit every man's occasion." 
He also says : ''Certainly it is an Art which requires great paines 
and a good witt, and is consecrate to the Counsels of Princes." 

127 



So we have, in analysing this first objection, made good 
progress when we have learned — (1) the admitted differences 
in the types; (2) from Bacon himself of the use of bi-formed 
alphabets; (3) the clear and full explanation of the cipher 
itself, which can be applied to these differences; (4) his state- 
ment that it is an art which requires great pains and a good wit 
(and good vision as well) ; (5) that its importance is so great 
that it is consecrate to the counsels of princes. This really 
leaves but one question: did Bacon print this particular cipher 
into his books ? I answer from a study of months and years 
that he did, and that I have correctly transcribed it. 

2. The correspondent says : "These differences were by no 
means confined to the period when Bacon lived, or to the books 
in which Mrs. Gallup alleges a secret cypher — in fact, they are 
to be detected in similar profusion in books published thirty- 
five years after Bacon's death — notably in the third folio of 
Shakespeare, 1661." 

I replied to this in a former communication to the Times, 
stating that in some old books of the period similar founts of 
type in two or more forms are used ; that I have endeavoured 
to find the cipher in some of these, but found the forms were 
used promiscuously, without method, and the differences could 
not be classified to produce, when separated into "groups of 
five," words and sentences in the bi-literal cipher. But this has 
no direct bearing on the subject. As Bacon's invention con- 
sisted in making use (by slight alteration) of varieties and 
forms of type then, as now, in common use, he would have 
nothing to do with the introduction of the forms, their general 
use, or continuance. He employed a method by which two 
forms were arranged in a definite way, to serve his purpose in 
his own publications, while the method would be absolutely be- 
yond discovery without the key. This key he withheld until 
1623. We now know that Bacon used this method from 1579 
to the end of his career, and that Rawley employed it until 
1635 for cipher purposes. How much later it was used I have 
befu unable to learn, that being the latest date of my decipher- 
ing. 



128 



"Confined to Few Types." 

3. "These differences, in so far as they are well marked, 
uniform, and coherent, appear to be confined to very few types 
— in the case' of Shakespeare's plays (first, second, and third 
folios, 1623, 1632, 1661) to some ten or twelve at most of the 
capital letters." 

This is incorrect, as I have observed in replying to Objec- 
tion 1. But starting with twelve capitals, there is half that 
alphabet. The others can be found by closer observation. Many 
of the small letters are as well marked in some of the types, 
not only in the First Folio, but especially in the Historie of the 
Raigne of King Henry the Seventh (1622), and in the first 
edition of De Augmentis Scientiarum (1623). 

Differences Due to Various Causes. 

4. He states : "Apart from such well-defined differences, 
there are to be observed in the Italic types of the period in- 
numerable and unclassifiable differences of form, due, it would 
seem, to many contributory causes, such as defective manufac- 
ture, broken face, careless locking of formes (involving bad 
alignment or improper inclination of individual letters), bad 
ink, bad paper, and the great age of the impression." 

It is true there are differences that are not the distinctive 
differences governing- their use, but it is very rarely indeed that 
a letter is found that is not paired with another, which, though 
like in some respects, is unlike in certain definite features. It 
involves no more difficulty to find how a number of letters 
similar, yet with certain distinctive differences, are to be sep- 
arated into two classes, than to distinguish in the same way a 
number of letters in entirely different forms. Bacon himself 
speaks of the multi- or bi-formed type. We have difficulties 
arising from very natural causes, but there are none that cannot 
be overcome with time and patient study. 

Mb. Mallock's Examples. 

5. "Mrs. Gallup's manipulation of these minor differences 
follows no clear and consistent rule or rules ; so that types of 
many differing characteristics are classed by her as belonging to 

129 



one fount, while others closely resembling each other are classed 
by her as belonging to two different founts on different oc- 
casions." 

This is erroneous. There is no "manipulation," and the 
rules are consistent. In a few instances the same kinds of 
letters are wrongly marked as a and h because of printers' 
errors, which are detected by methods elsewhere more specifical- 
ly set out, or they may be changed in value by a peculiar mark, 
as explained on the first page of the deciphered work from 
Henry Seventh. Printers' errors are not infrequent in the 
works. They are found in Bacon's own illustration in De Aug- 
mentis Scientiarum (1624), e.g. In conquiesti, line 5, and in 
quos, line 10, the letter q is from the "6 fount." It should be an 
'^'^a-fount" letter, and was so printed in the first or "London 
edition" (1623). An I in line 12, and another in line 14, is 
from the wrong fount. There is also an error in grouping in 
the 1624 edition, which does not occur in the 1623. 

As it happened, similar printers' errors occurred in one of 
Mr. Mallock's examples in the Nineteenth Century — the passage 
from De Augmentis in which he concealed his own couplet: 
"The star of Shakespeare, etc." — and that work was done by 
twentieth-century printers, of Mr. Mallock's own selection. 
The passage he quotes, printed in the two forms of types, can- 
not be deciphered as printed on account of an error in the tenth 
group, and a few letters used from M'rong founts. I have sent 
Mr. Mallock the correction ; but I have been wondering since 
whether it were not incorporated intentionally, to test my 
powers of observation, for after the tenth group the rest of the 
passage is simply impossible to read in bi-literal cipher, until 
the short group is detected and a new division made. I cannot 
think Mr. Mallock made these mistakes in marking his MS. 
Some errors exist in our own Avork, which have been dis- 
covered since publication, and may quite possibly be found 
by those who study the book. 

Printers and "Digraphs." 

6. "In the period when the writings under discussion 
were published, printers made a liberal use of digraphs, such 
as 'ft,' 'fh,' 'ct,' 'fl,' etc. (In one page of 24 lines, from which 

130 



Mrs. Gallup derives her cipher narrative, there are 26 
digraphs. ) With regard to the deciphering of these, Mrs. Gallup 
suggests no rules and obeys no laws." 

Again this is erroneous in the last clause. I quote from a 
preceding paragraph of this correspondent's own article, re- 
garding Bacon's treatment of the digraph, as follows: "In the 
example which he gave of the enfolding of such a cipher in a 
portion of one of Cicero's letters, he printed an se (diphthong), 
occuring in the Latin word 'cseteris,' not as a diphthong at all, 
but as two separate letters — ae. Similarly, he caused the ordin- 
ary digraph 'ct,' invariably printed in one type in those days, to 
be printed as two separate letters — ct, showing, I think con- 
clusively, that in his cipher, as applied to printing, digraphs 
must be — treated separately. Our "Correspondent" says "di- 
graphs must be kept out of the print," but it is a wrong infer- 
ence. These diphthongs and digraphs must be compared with 
one another, not with single letters, but the parts are to be con- 
sidered separately. They will each be found to have distinctive 
features, and a decipherer who has become at all expert will at 
once determine their proper classification. 

KoMAN Types. 

7. "In certain specific instances, Mrs. Gallup's decipher- 
ing is arithmetically incorrect, or must be helped out with the 
help of an arbitrary employment of Roman types — on occasion 
even this device will not avail to produce the requisite number 
of letters for her alleged cipher message." 

For the specific instances where Roman type is used, 
Bacon's instructions are found on pp. 66-67 of the Bi-literal 
Cypher, which "Correspondent" has evidently overlooked. I 
have used this passage on another occasion, but will quote again, 
as others have stumbled over the same difficulty : 

"In order to conceale my Cypher more perfectly, I am pre- 
paring for th' purpose a sette of alphabets in th' Latine tipe, 
not for use in th' greatest or lengthy story or epistle, but as 
another disguise, for, in ensample, a prologue, prsefatio, the 
epilogues, and headlines attracted too much notice, ^oe othe' 
waie of diverting th' curious could be used where th' exterior 

131 



epistle is but briefe, however it will not thus turne aside my 
decipherer, for his eye is too well practis'd in artes that easily 
misleade others who enquire th' waye." 

I found Roman type used in such places, and the differ- 
ences in the letters are quite distinct, but no use was made of 
this new device, so far as I have found, until 1623, when it ap- 
peared in the First Folio, and in Vitae et Mortis. 

An incident, for the moment mortifying, occurred in Bos- 
ton, by which I discovered an error of our printers in the first 
edition issued. Those having copies of the first edition will 
notice the word "Baron" is left out of the signature, which 
reads in the later edition Francis, Baron of Verulam (p. 166), 
deciphered from the short poem signed "I. M." in the Shake- 
speare Folio. When I visited Boston to continue my researches, 
friends previously interested in my work mentioned the diffi- 
culty they had in trying to decipher, as I did, this portion. I 
remarked the Roman letters must be used; to which they re- 
plied the number of Italic letters corresponded with the number 
of groups required, but the groups would not "read." Upon 
deciphering it again, in the presence of these people, I found 
the word Baron had been dropped out in the printing, and the 
error was corrected in the second edition. 

The answers already given meet the summarised objection 
of the correspondent's eighth and ninth paragraphs. 

The Deciphering Wokkeoom. 

10. "The nature of the Cipher is such, being in fact en- 
tirely dependent upon the presence and position of a certain 
number of b's, that, given a framework of such determining 
factors (which might easily be supplied by the acknowledged 
differences in a few letters), a misdirected ingenuity could with 
patience supply all that a preconceived notion could possibly 
demand." 

The cipher alphabet Bacon illustrates in De Augmentis 
Scientiarutn contains 68 a& and 52 ^''s. The proportion in 
general use was found to be about 5 to 3. Perhaps I cannot do 
better to clear myself from the aspersions here intimated than 
to explain the methods of the workroom by which the larger 
part of the deciphering was actually done. A type-writing 

132 



machine was changed in its mechanism to space automatically 
after each group of five letters. The operator alone copied every 
Italic letter, and the sheets came to me with the letters already 
grouped. The different forms of letters in the book to be de- 
ciphered were4hen made a study, the peculiarities of each fount 
classified and sketched in an enlarged and accentuated form 
upon a small chart, and the 'b fount' (being the fewer) was 
thoroughly learned. The chart was always before me for use 
upon doubtful letters. I marked upon the sheet on which the 
letters had been grouped onl}^ those that I found to be of the 
'b fount.' An assistant marked the as and transcribed the 
result, when I knew for the first time the reading of the deci- 
phered product. It was thus impossible for me to "preconceive" 
it, and no amount of "ingenuity, misdirected" or otherwise, 
could have developed the hundreds of pages of MS. of these con- 
secutive letters into anything except what the cipher letters 
would spell out. 

The Operator and the Errors. 

Excepting, of course, occasional corrections of the errors 
of the operator in copying, or myself in determining the proper 
fount, the work stands exactly as it left the assistant's hands. 
The original sheets are unchanged and in my possession. Er- 
rors occurred in the work as it progressed, but they were so 
guarded against by the system itself that the deciphering was 
quickly brought to a stop until they were corrected. Coming 
from the assistant, the words were without capitals, or punctua- 
tion, as would be the case by any method of deciphering a 
cipher. The work of capitalization and punctuation, in the 
book, is my own, and in this alone was choice permitted me. 

The difficulty with "A Correspondent," as with many ob- 
servers, is that he jumps at once to conclusions from very super- 
ficial and limited examination, as well as unfamiliarity with the 
principles which underlie the work; and while his keenness of 
observation is greater than some evince, he has not, by any 
means, given the matter sufficient study to become an expert, 
or to warrant him in expressing a critical judgment. He would 
not expect to learn Greek in a day, nor to decipher hieroglyphics 
on an obelisk upon a first attempt. There are in the Plays five 
pairs of alphabets of twenty-four letters each (capital and 

133 



small) in the different styles and sizes of Italic type. In other 
words, four hundred and eighty different letters have to be 
compared with their fellows to determine the classification. It 
is not, then, the work of a day or a week to enable one to pass 
an opinion upon the Folio as a whole, and yet that is what he 
attempts to do. 

The "Times" Facsimiles. 

The Times reproduces a page of facsimiles and an illus- 
tration taken from Spenser's Complaints, and has also arranged 
in enlarged form some small letters. In fairness the captials 
should have appeared as well. In the processes necessary for 
reproduction, upon newspaper of coarse fibre and uneven surface 
with the speed of a modern press, many distinctive features 
of the letters have been lost or distorted to the skilled eye, and 
the unskilled should not be asked to form a judgment of the 
integrity of a difiicult cipher from such utterly untrustworthy 
reproductions. 

As explained in the Introduction to the second edition of 
my book, the facsimiles were not satisfactory. The difficulties 
arising from age, unequal absorption of ink, poor paper, and 
poor printing in the old books, cause some features to be ex- 
aggerated, while others disappear; and on account of unavoid- 
able inaccuracies, they were omitted from the third edition. 

Inspiration. 

It is strange how an inadvertent word or phrase, in the 
hands of those who choose to pervert, will return to plague one. 
In an article in Baconiana, I enumerated the requirements for 
the work of deciphering as "eyesight of the keenest and perfect 
accuracy of vision in distinguishing minute differences in form, 

lines, angles, and curves of the printed letters unlimited 

time and patience, persistency and aptitude, love for over- 
coming puzzling difficulties, and I sometimes think inspiration." 
Any one who has worked long in an absorbing and difficult 
ifield, will know that the word in this connection meant only 
the light that breaks upon one's mind, in the solution of some 
difficulty as the result of earnest effort ; and for a critic to make 
from this a charge that I allege the cipher work to be one of 
inspiration on my part is such a misuse of terms as to be wholly 

134 



unjustifiable. I think I have the right to complain when the 
word so used is made the basis of sneering attack through the 
public press. The word was used by me in no other connection, 
and as my critics must kndw, in no other than this very harmless 
and allowable sense. This is particularly in reply to a lengthy 
editorial in the Times, which assumed that I made claims to 
"inspiration." 

Those who have read my book carefully will recall some of 
the difficulties recounted on page 11 of the Introduction, re- 
lating to a subject that has puzzled many students — i.e., the 
wrong paging of the Folio and some of the other old books. 
It is told in few words in the book, but they are totally inade- 
quate to describe the strain upon eyes and nerves in those days 
of alternating struggle and elation as one by one the difficulties 
were overcome. I think my readers will pardon a careless, per- 
haps irrevelant use of the term, "I sometimes think inspiration" 
— may have prompted me to make one more trial. 

Mk. Lang and Mrs. Gallup. 

I am also desired to refer to the writings of Mr. Lang, 
who, on several occasions, has made the Bi-literal Cypher the 
theme of much ironical pleasantry, more especially in the 
Monthly Revieiv. Mr. Lang is one of those happy individuals 
possessed of a large vocabulary and of a vivid imagination that 
like Tennyson's babbling brook "goes on for ever," but he pre- 
fers the interrogation to the period — questions more than he 
asserts. 

In the Monthly Review he cites again, from his Morning 
Post article (August 1901), some of the reasons for considering 
Bacon a lunatic. He has, however, omitted one query then made 
regarding "the new Atlantis men sought beyond the western 
sea :" "Was Bacon ignorant of the fact that America was dis- 
covered ?" The question was not repeated after I called at- 
tention to the fact that in New Atlantis Bacon said, "Wee 
sailed from Peru." 

The Alpha and Omega of his article — since it appears on 
the first page and the last — is Mr. Sidney Lee's declaration 
that the cipher cannot exist in the books in which I fcnotc it 
does exist. I pointed out in a recent communication to the 

135 



Times that Mr. Lee liad not even understood the eleinentar}- 
principles of the cipher. This is betrayed in his statement: 
''Italic and Roman types were never intermingled in the man- 
ner which would be essential if the words embodied Bacon's 
biliteral cipher" — for that is not the manner of its incorpora- 
tion. Mr. Lang goes no farther than this very arbitrary decision 
in his examination of the cipher itself. 

He says: "The consistency of Mrs. Gallup next amazes 
us. Greene, Peele, Marlowe, and Shakespeare, resemble each 
other in style (or so she says), because 'one hand wrote them 
all' (i., p, 3). But Bacon (deciphered) avers, T varied my 
style to suit different men, since no two show the same taste and 
like imagination.' (i., p. 34).... Bacon 'let his own [style] 
be seen.' " Mr. Lang should have quoted an additional line — 
"yet should [let] my owne bee seene, as a third o' warpe in 
my entire fabricke," and it would explain why there are both 
resemblances and differences in the style of those dramatic 
works, which have been commented upon by numberless writers 
as giving evidence of collaboration or of plagiarism. 

The Wifehood and Motherhood of Elizabeth. 

Mr. Lang thinks the idea of the wifehood and motherhood 
of Elizabeth originated in Mr. Lee's articles in the Dictionary 
of National Biography cited as corroborating the cipher. The 
facts set forth in Mr. Lee's work are very good circumstantial 
evidence. Assuredly the statments in the word-cipher and in the 
bi-literal should accord, for in Bacon's design the principal use 
of the one was to teach, and assist in deciphering, the others 
Mr. Lang quotes: "He learned from the interview and suhse- 
quent occurrences," and exclaims. " how Elizabethan is the 
style !" 

In Love's Labour s Lost (Act II., Sc. i.) he may read: 

at which interview 
All liberall reason would I yeeld unto. 

In Troilus and Cressida (Act I., Sc. iii.) we find: 
To their subsequent volumes. 

And in Henry the Fifth (V. Prol.) is the line: 
Omit all the occurrences. 

This is where Mr. Lang should exclaim again, "How Eliza- 
bethan the style !" 

136 



My critics would find it interesting and profitable to learn 
how many expressions, thought to be modern, are to be seen 
in the original works. They would be surprised — agreeably or 
otherwise — at the long list. 

• "Tidder" or Bacon. 

The next point is this: "His name, Tr. Bacon,' is his 
only 'by adoption,' " and in a footnote Mr. Lang quotes : " 'My 
name is Tidder, yet men speak of me as Bacon.' " In Bacon's 
Historie of the Raigne of King Henry the Seventh (p. 151), 
we find the name of the first reigning Tudor spelled Tidder. 
The assertion "We be Tudor" merely shows that he belonged to 
the Royal house. It was certainly not from Robert Dudley that 
he claimed a title to the throne. I myself asked, "Why Francis 
I. ?" when this passage was deciphered ; and the answer is per- 
haps in this — as Elizabeth was "Queene of England, Fraunce, 
and Ireland, and of Virginia," her son as king would be Erancis 
III. of France and Francis I. of England, as James VI. of 
Scotland became James I. of England. The right to the French 
title is questionable, of course; but when the play of Edward 
the Third has been deciphered we shall know how Bacon re- 
garded it. 

In the expression, "our law giveth to the first-borne of the 
royall house the title of the Prince of Wales," Bacon did not 
intend to say "the statute giveth." Had he used custom no one 
would have cavilled, but custom is defined in law as "long-es- 
tablished practice, or usage, considered as unwritten laiv, and 
resting for authority on long consent," and, even at that time, 
it had long been customary to invest the eldest son of the sov- 
reign with this title. In the Historie of Henry the Seventh (p. 
207), speaking of the time when "Henry, Duke of Yorke, was 
created Prince of Wales, and Earle of Chester and Flint," he 
added, "For the Dukedom of Cornewall devolved to him by 
statute." We see per contra that in this place he did not mean 
by custom. 

Bacon and the Small Poems. 

As evidence of the superficiality of Mr. Lang's knowledge 
of the book he attempts to criticise, I quote: "In 1596, in his 
'Faerie Queene,' Bacon grew wilder, in saying 'We were in good 

137 



hope that when our divers small poemes might bee seene in 
printed forme, th' approval o' Lord Leicester might be gain'd !' 
The earliest of the small Bacon-Spenser works used here, by 
Mrs. Gallup, is of 1591. Leicester died in 1588. Only a 
raving maniac like Mrs. Gallup's Bacon could hope to please 
Leicester, who died in 1588, by 'small poemes' printed in 1591, 
if he means that." 

Has Mr. Lang read so carelessly that he thinks "he means 
that" ? Does he really not preceive that Bacon was speaking of 
the small poems appearing between 15Y9 and 1588 — 8hep- 
heards' Calender in several editions, Virgil's Gnat nearly ready 
for the printer and suggestively dedicated to the Earl of Leices- 
ter? If a careless reading, it discredits his criticism; if a 
wilful perversion, it is unworthy and without justification. 

This is much like his remarkable statement in Longman's 
Magazine regarding the Argument of the Iliad: "The right 
course with Mrs. Gallup is to ask her to explain why or how 
Bacon stole from Pope's Homer. . . .and how he could be (as 

he certainly was) ignorant of facts of his own time These 

circumstances make it certain that, though the cipher may be a 
very nice cipher, Mrs. Gallup must have interpreted it all 
wrong. She will see that, she would have seen it long ago, if 
she had read Pope's Homer and had known anything about 
Elizabethan history." 

We all know what this impossible charge — that "Bacon 
stole from Pope's Homer," and also the insinuation regard- 
ing Melville — covertly asserts. I have fully set out in another 
article the answer to this baseless accusation of Mr. Marston ; 
but I will here repeat that any statement that I copied from 
Pope, or from any other source whatever, in obtaining the mat- 
ter put forth as deciphered from Bacon's works, is false in every 
particular. 

Bacon and Elizabeth's Marriage, 

Mr. Lang, and others, have asserted that Bacon refers to 
the first Lord Burghley as Robert. This is incorrect. Bacon 
says Robert Cecil when he means Robert Cecil, and at no other 
time. Robert is not only named, but described unmistakably. 
Mr. Lang says, "Robert Cecil was born in 1563, or thereabout, 
was younger than Bacon," consequently could not have incited 

138 



the Queen against him, etc., and devotes a page to mis-statements 
and sarcasms. Here again is he ignorant, or indulges in wilful 
perversion. The encyclopaedias say, "Robert Cecil was born in 
1550." He was therefore eleven years older than Bacon, and 
twenty-seven years of age when the incident referred to oc- 
curred. We learn also from the same source: "Of his cousin,. 
Francis Bacon,he appears to have been jealous." The "blunder" 
is Mr. Lang's, not Bacon's, and it is not an evidence that "either 
an ignorant American wrote all this, or Bacon was an idiot." 

In speaking of Elizabeth's marriage, Mr. Lang says, "The 
second was 'after her ascent to royal power' (1558). Any one 
but Bacon would have said, 'after the death of Dudley's first 
wife,' because only after that death could the marriage be 
legal." 

What Bacon really said is this : "Af te' her ascent to royale 
power, before my birth, a second nuptiall rite duly witness'd 
was observed, soe that I was borne in holy wedlocke" (p. 154). 
Mr. Lang's opinion of what any other man might have said is 
quite immaterial. 

A question of Bacon's legitimacy would, without a doubt, 
have been raised ; and as Leicester favoured his second son, 
Essex, this may account for the express wish to have the story 
openly told. Such questions were debated concerning more 
than one royal title in those days, but Bacon believed his birth 
in holy wedlock was sufficient legitimation. The mere fact 
that both Mary and Elizabeth succeeded to the throne, although 
one or the other was not strictly legitimate, would confirm this 
opinion, and the history of the founding of the line of Tudor 
involved the same question. 

I regret that lack of space prevents a reference to some of 
Mr. Lang's other remarks, which are equally subject to criti- 
cism and correction. Brander Matthews, in Pen and Inh, 
formulates "Twelve Rules for Reviewers," that will, I am very 
sure, commend themselves to those who desire to make criticism 
of value. Had Mr. Lang followed any of these rules he would 
have written in a different manner and more to his own credit. 

Me. Schooling and the Cipher. 

I can only say that with regard to Mr. Schooling as with 
thousands of others, defective vision or superficial examination 

139 



is responsible for liis criticism, for it culminates in the asser- 
tion, merely, that different founts of Italic type are not used 
in the books referred to, and that the work ''can be regarded only 
as a phantasy of my imagining, wholly unworthy of credence." 
I again assert, with that degree of positiveness which comes 
from a study of years, that the Italic types are from different 
founts and are used in the manner I have set forth. There is 
no room whatever for imagination in the work, 

Mr. Schooling enters into particulars, and reports upon 
o'&, ns, and p's in a few lines of small letters, and says "they 
are from the same fount, and the cipher, therefore, non-ex- 
istent." In this he is absolutely wrong. He makes no mention 
of the marked differences in the capitals, and, too, he should 
have studied the originals on many pages, as I have done, for in 
the photographic facsimiles of the book some of the distinctive 
features are lost. It is difficult to describe in words the par- 
ticular lines in a drawing, and equally so those in several forms 
of type, but I will attempt to make the differences clear. 

The Italics in Spenser. 

Extending these examples of Mr. Schooling, take for illus- 
tration the Italics in the first lines of the selection from Spenser. 
The type is large and clear, and there are several letters so 
close together that comparisons can easily be made. 

full Ladie the La Marie. 

There are two captial L's. The serif of the first is curved, 
of iho second straight. At the bottom, the horizontal of the 
first gradually thickens, and the small line at the end is nearly 
vertical, while the horizontal of the second is of even thickness 
and the small line slanting. 

There are three small a's. The oval of the first is narrow 
and pointed at the top, those of the other two are broad at the 
top. The small line at the bottom of the first is long and strong, 
of the other two short and weak. 

There are three small e^s. The ovals of the first two are 
broad, the letters themselves narrow; the oval of the last is 
longer and more pointed, but the letter itself is wide. 

The two small i's do not stand at the same degree of in- 
clination, and the dot of the first is slightly to the left. 

140 



The capital ilf is a striking form, and the plain M of that 
size of type must be familiar to Mr. Schooling and others. 

Taking the next Italic line, the small ns are from different 
founts. The inclination of the second is greater than that of 
the first. The stem of the first n (in Honourable) is straight, 
that of the second (in and) is slightly curved. The small line 
at the bottom of the first stands well under the downward 
stroke, that of the second freely leaves the downward stroke. 

In the next line, the difference in the small I's is very 
marked, and one is much longer than the other. 

In the line below, an e from the "b fount" and one from 
the "a fount" stand together in the word bee. These can easily 
be discriminated, but the characteristics of the e in this size of 
type are the reverse of the same in the large size above. 

The in lo7ig is a wider oval than the o from the "a 
fount" in bountifull. It has already been pointed out why the 
n's in both words are "a-fount" letters, although the one in long 
is not a perfect letter — the lower part of the last stroke being 
blotted — but, as I have said on other occasions, where broken 
or blotted letters or errors of the printer occur in the original, 
the context will unmistakably indicate what they are. 

The "Novum Organum." 

In the Praefatio of Novum Organuni, the first letter con- 
sidered is the small o, and of this two examples given by Mr. 
Schooling are in the second line — in explorata and pronuntiare. 
The longest diameter produced until it intersects the line of 
writing does not make so large an angle in the first as in the 
second. The oval is much narrower in the first. The descrip- 
tion of these two will suffice for all others not changed by a 
mark, unless a printer's error occurs. 

The two p's in propria are most easily compared, as the 
first is from the "a fount" and the second is from the "6 fount." 
The stem of the first is not quite so long as that of the second ; 
and, in the first, the oval is somewhat angular on the right side 
at the top, in the second this angularity is seen at the bottom. 
The same rule applies to other cases. Of the half-dozen cited 
by Mr. Schooling, I have merely chosen two that stand close 
together. He would find as great difficulty in the differentia- 

141 



tion of the o's and c's of any two founts of modern Italic type, 
as in these he points out, for the differences are often as minute. 

Bacon and the Compositor. 

Mr. Schooling says, "Mrs. Gallup does not tell us how 
Lord Bacon managed to get his work set up by the compositor." 

Any printer will tell him, if he will inquire, that it is not 
more difficult to take certain letters that have been marked on 
the MS. from one case of Italic type, and certain other letters, 
not marked, from another case of Italic, than to take Roman 
from one case and Italic from another in ordinary composition. 
The system has the advantage that the printer, in following 
copy, could not know the cipher without the key, w^hich in 
Bacon's case was withheld until 1623 — forty-four years after 
the cipher was invented and first used. 

The Powers of Imagination. 

Perhaps I should thank Mr. Schooling for the implied 
compliment to my abilities in the realm of creation ; for if 
not a deciphering, what is the alternative ? I must first have 
conceived the plot of the entire fabric of 380 pages, its histor- 
ical points, statements of facts not recorded in history — which 
in some particulars conflict with, in others supplement, the 
records. I must have imagined the moanings of remorse over 
the tragedy of Essex ; the discovery of the motherhood of Eliza- 
beth ; guessed at the broadened field of Bacon's literary powers 
to take in all the works which are disclosed as coming from 
his hand ; the directions for writing out the word-cipher ; the 
argument of the Tragedy of Anne Boleyn; the epitome of the 
Iliad and of the Odyssey; the explanatory letters of Dr. Rawley 
and Ben Jonson that are found in the cipher ; the flights of 
fancy which occasionally appear in the deciphered work, and 
all the rest. This must all have been written out in the old 
English spelling and in the language of Bacon's time ; this 
previously written plot and story in the main narration must 
have been fitted to the exact number of Italic letters, and so 
arranged that the forms of the capital letters and those whose 
differences are easily perceived, must in every case fit into 
place as an a or a b, so that those letters, at least, should con- 
sistently follow Bacon's biliteral cipher. The simple enumer- 

142 



ation, with all that these things imply, carries the refutation 
of the possibility of such a manner of production, to say noth- 
ing of the absurdity of attempting it. Had it been undertaken, 
it would have been along lines that were better known, and 
statments of facts would have been in accord with the records. 
Historical romance would never so far have transcended the 
beliefs of the world, nor subverted all previous ideas concern- 
ing authorship of literature which will be immortal. The only 
reason for the book's existence is that it is the transcription 
of a cipher placed in the works for the purposes disclosed by 
its decipherment. 



143 



BACOA^— SHAKESPEAEE. 

The Times, London, Eng., Jan. 27, 1902. 

To THE Editor of the Times: 

Sir, — Your issues of December 19, 20, and 21 have been 
forwarded to me by Messrs. Gay and Bird, and, while regret- 
ting that distance will cause much time to elapse between 
the issues and the time this can reach London, I yet desire 
space to reply to the communications of Mr. Marston and Mr. 
Lee concerning myself, and the book recently given to the pub- 
lic, ''The Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon." I trust I 
may not be refused because of lapse of time, or for any other 
reason. 

I hope the gentlemen do not mean to be rude or do me an 
injustice, and I do not think they can persist in the character- 
ization which their words imply. 

The assertion that Mr. Mallock has become "addlepated," 
because of thinking there may be something in the cipher, must 
be something of a shock to his friends. 

Mr. Marston did me the honour of two favourable notices, 
in succeeding issues of the Publishers' Circular. I was about 
to thank him for numbers sent to me when I learned that he 
had prepared and published an elaborate article attempting to 
discredit the entire work, because of doubts arising in his mind 
upon a single point. He does not base his disbelief upon any 
investigation he has made of the cipher itself, but because a 
fragment which forms a part of Bacon's "Argument" or 
epitome (but not the full translation) of the Iliad, in that por- 
tion which catalogues the ships and the troops they transported, 
is similar — "nearly like" — Pope's translation of the same pas- 
sages, ergo, it must be that I paraphrased Pope, and hence that 
the whole cipher fabric is tumbled into dust. Because of this 
similarity he takes Mr. Mallock to task for considering my 
work seriously, and declares that, as I have, as he thinks, copied 
Pope in this, the results of my four years' research in America 

144 



and ill England, set down on 385 printed pages, must be pure 
invention, and Mr. Mallock a poor deluded mortal to have gone 
into the cipher at all. The statement of the case exhibits the 
value of the conclusion. 

It does not appear just how much variation Mr. Marston 
would have between the translations of the identical Greek 
text, describing definite things, to prove which was the correct 
one, and which the copy. It will also be noted that this is not 
one of the portions of Homer's wondrous story where imagina- 
tion ma}^ run riot, and imagery and poetic license add lustre to 
the original. 

The claim of identities set me to wondering whom else 
I might have paraphrased, or if it was not possible that Pope 
had copied from some one other than Bacon. An examination 
of six different English translations and one Latin shows me 
such substantial accord, that either of them could be called 
with equal justice a paraphrase of Pope, or that Pope had 
copied from the others. 

In ]>hrasing no two translations of the Iliad entirely agree, 
but are we to conclude that, because the translations of the same 
text- are in substantial agreement (though not exact), that one 
of the two most nearly alike must be a paraphrase ? The 
trifling additions showing some exterior knowledge of persons 
and places may be found in Bacon's other works. 

It will be observed by readers of the " Bi-literal Cypher" 
that the fragment of the Fourth Book of the Iliad which is 
injected by Bacon into the "Argument" is for illustration 
merely, and is clearly stated to be only " a supreme effort of 
memory" of the fuller translation which he had previously 
embedded as a part of the mosaic in his works, to be extracted 
and reconstructed through the methods of another cipher. 

Surely there can be no more distressing condition than 
when critics refuse to know all the facts, and are guilty of 
drawing conclusions without them. Bacon, who knew human 
nature, has described this class of minds most precisely in his 
aphorisms, and it would almost seem he had this controversy 



145 



in view, or at least a permonition of it, when he says, in 
jSTumber xxxiii : — 

"This must be plainly avowed; no judgment can be rightly 
formed either of my method or of the discoveries to which it leads 
by means of anticipations. .. .since I cannot be called upon to abide 
by the sentence of a tribunal which is itself on its trial." 

"One method of delivery alone remains to us:.... we must lead 
men to the particulars themselves and their series and order; while 
men on their side must force themselves for awhile to lay their 
notions by and begin to familiarize themselves with facts." (XXXVI.) 

Mr. Lee, too, bases his disbelief on most inconckisive 
grounds. The witty author of "Democritns to the Reader" 
said that any one who sought what he did not want, or that 
would do him harm when found, wanted wisdom. To be exact, 
it was expressed less euphemistically, "He is a fool that seeks 
what he does not want." 

Mr. Lee insists that, because he has collated 25 copies of 
the plays, during which time he was not looking for a cipher, 
none exists. As well say that the stars of late discovery which 
are as yet unknown to any but the most skilled eye of the 
astronomer do not exist because Mr. Lee, w^ith his unskilled 
eye, has not discovered them while looking for something else. 

Mr. Sinnett, in the same issue of The Times, states the 
case fairly in the remark that there are two schools of thinkers 
on the subject — those who have studied the matter, and those 
who have not — and he illustrates the feelings of a surprisingly 
large class by the repetition of the remark of a friend, who, 
when asked if he had seriously considered certain points (of the 
Baconians), replied: "I would rather hang myself than con- 
sider anything so atrocious." I have no doubt Mr. Lee would 
sympathize with, if not echo, this sentiment. 

I wish politely, and with all due deference, to assert, with 
a positiveness as emphatic as that of Mr. Lee, that the cipher 
does exist in the typography of the Plays, and in the "Anatomy 
of Melancholy" and in the other works which I have deci- 
phered. The difference between us is that I found what I was 
looking for (and much besides), while Mr. Lee did not find 
what he w^as not looking for. 



146 



Another aphorism, JSTumber xxxviii., would apply here : — 

"The idols and false notions which are now in possession of the 
human understanding, and have taken deep root therein, so beset 
men's minds that truth can hardly find entrance." 

And again, in Number xlvi: — 
"The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion 
(either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) 
draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there 
be a greater weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet 
these it either neglects and despises, or else by some distinction 
sets aside and rejects, in order that by this great and pernicious 
predetermination the authority of its former conclusions may remain 
inviolate." 

If Mr. Lee has a vision sufficiently accurate to discrimi- 
nate in form, and will spend as much time as I have spent 
upon the typography of the old books, he will find the letters 
can be classified, and starting from the proper points and plac- 
ing in "groups of five" the Bi-literal Cipher will read as I have 
written, and will not read anything else. 
Sincerely yours, 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 
Detroit, January 9. 



P. S. Jan. 11. — Copies of your issue of December 26 
and 27 have just reached me. 

The articles on the "Bacon Bi-literal Cypher" show that 
The Times is not averse to whatever aids in elucidation of this 
new phase of the Bacon-Shakespeare question. 

I am glad to note that "A Correspondent" has taken 
some of the preliminary steps to an actual examination of the 
cipher and apparently has the perception required to reach 
conclusions that Mr. Mallock and Mr. Sinnett have also reached 
as to distinctive variations in the forms of letters used in the 
old books. This denotes real progress in the investigation, and 
I think the gentleman, with patience, would easily become a 
decipherer. The peculiarities of the type are clear to the skilled 
artist or engraver, but they are not so quickly apparent to those 
less fitted for the closest observation. 

Some of the difficulties encountered by the novice are 
explained by Mr. Sinnett in the issue of the 27th. I shall be 
greatly pleased to clear up some of this correspondent's diffi- 

147 



culties, in another communication, but will only note in this 

two paragraphs. One difficulty he mentions is that in certain 

passages he does not find sufficient Italic letters to make up 

the extracted sentences. He had overlooked the application 

of the passage in the book, on pp. 66-67 : — 

"In order to oonceale my Cypher more perfectly I am preparing 
for th' purpose a sette of alphabets in th' Latine tipe not for use 
in th' greatest or lengthy story or epistle,' but as another disguise, 
for, in ensample, a prologue, praefatio, the epilogues, and head lines 
attracted too much notice. I, therefore, have given much trouble to 
mine ayders by making two kinds or formes of these letters. These 
be not designed for other use than hath but now beene explain'd, nor 
must you looke to see them employ'd if a reason for th' change 
appeare, but there will be warning given you for your instruction or 
guidance. Noe othe' waie of diverting th' curious could be used where 
th' exteriour epistle is but briefe. however it will not thus turn aside 
my decipherer, for his eye is too well practs'd in artes that easily 
misleade others who enquire of th' waie." 

There are a very few dedications, commendatory poems, 
headings, etc., in which Roman letters were used by Bacon. 
These are in his later printings. 

Another thing this correspondent makes note of is that 
many of the old books of the Elizabethan period have the same 
differences. I have examined many of these, beside those 
belonging to Bacon in which differences occur. In some of 
them I was led to think the cipher might be foimd, but on 
examination it was seen that the different forms were used 
promiscuously, without method, and could not be grouped in 
fives to read in the bi-literal. 

Replying to Mr. Lee's communication in the issue of the 

27th, I quote this extraordinary extract: 

"I should like to state unmistakably that I hold there to be 
not the smallest jot of even prima facie justification.... in the text 
of the First Folio for the belief that a cipher is concealed in that 

volume. I write with a fine copy on my desk Italic and Roman 

type appear in the preliminary pages. .. .they are never intermingled 
in the manner which would be essential if the words embodied Bacon's 
bi-literal cipher." 

His idea of the intermingling of the Roman and Italic 
type as an essential is entirely wrong. If he had read my 
book understandingly, he would have known the different 
founts used by Bacon were in the differing forms of Italic type, 
not the Roman, except in the very few instances noted above. 
The cipher letters are not produced by intermingling Roman 



148 



and Italic type in the Plays. He will find on every page of 
the Plays more than one fount or form of these Italic letters, 
and that not proper names only, but much besides was printed 
in them. See especially pp. 42-43, Merry Wives of Windsor. 

Quoting again from Mr. Lee : — "To assert that a bi-literal 
cipher can or does appear in a text printed as the First Folio is 
printed is a bold denial of plain facts." I wish to repeat, with 
equal earnestness and entire certainty, that to assert that the 
cipher cannot and does not exist in the text is a denial of a 
fact which I have demonstrated. 

He mistakenly says, "The proper names figuring in the 
text of the plays alone appear in a different type." To these 
must be added the abbreviated names of the speakers, the run- 
ning titles, etc., and all other words in Italic type, which 
together make up when deciphered over 50 pages of my book 
that are extracted from the folio. 

What shall we say of this quotation from Mr. Lee ? 

"Ignorance, vanity, inability to test evidence, lacl^ of scholarly 
habits of mind are in each of these instances found to be the main 
causes predisposing half-educated members of the public to the ac- 
ceptance of the delusion (!). And when any of the deluded victims 
have been narrowly examined they have invariably exhibited a tend- 
ency to monomania. .. .May a second Hogarth deal as effectually 
with Mrs. Gallup and Mr. Mallock, and their feeble-witted followers." 

Mr. Mallock "addlepated !" and "half -educated !" Lord 
Palmerston "feeble-witted" — "with a tendency to monomania !" 
Is this temperate discussion of a new discovery ? Is true criti- 
cism of this subject and its believers reduced to vituperation, 
and this the end of the argument ? 

The public will refuse to accept Mr. Lee's dictum as 
having any weight at all over against the examination made, 
and being made, by Mr. Mallock, Mr. Sinnett, and many others. 
I must assume them to be the peers of Mr. Lee in intelligence 
and discrimination, for he is most surely wrong and refuses 
knowledge, while they are willing to study the subject with 
patience and candour. 



149 



LITEEAEY WOELD. 
London. 

To The Editoe. 

Sir: — There is a sense of relief after the worst has been 
said, in the assurance that nothing more dreadful can be ex- 
pected. Since the "critic" of the Literary World has consigned 
me to that Avernus whose horrors all good people hope to es- 
cape, I should be beyond attack, as none would willingly follow 
me into the infernal regions. 

After reading the article entitled Galluping in Avernum, 
my eyes fell upon a clipping in which George Brandes is named 
as the "famous Danish critic, and the greatest of living Shake- 
spearean commentators." It says: "He dismisses the whole 
'^Baconian Craze' with the remark that it is on the one hand a 
piece of weak and inartistic feminine criticism, and on the 
other an Americanism and therefore lacking in spiritual del- 
icacy." 

The criticism in the Literary World of Bacon's Bi-literal 
Cypher and of the Tragedy of Anne Boleyn is not, I think, 
feminine nor American, but somehow the quality of spiritual 
delicacy seems lacking, and it can hardly be called artistic. 

It is only recently that I have noticed — this rule has not 
reached America — that some writers apparently think it is 
good form to pun, or play, upon another's surname. If the 
name is not pleasing to the ear, the mortal who bears it has 
perhaps a lifelong affliction, yet it is certainly a misfortune 
rather than a fault. ISTor did I suppose, until I saw the articles 
of a large number of reviewers, that any — except writers more 
intent on filling space than careful of the value of the matter — 
rushed into print before the subject discussed, or book reviewed 
was half read. And yet it is this critic's own confession, re- 
garding the Bi-literal Cypher, that he has read but "half the 
book, and a few scattered sentences of the rest." From this 
admittedly superficial reading he concludes a "Phantom per- 

150 



sonating Bacon claims to have written all the plays" etc. — the 
literature throughout which the ciphers, have with infinite pains 
been traced, and the principles upon which they are based, 
the keys and directions for their decipherment, ascertained 
and set out in the work he attempts to criticise. 

After quoting the statement that Elizabeth and Dudley 
were honorably married, and that Bacon and Essex were the 
issue of this union, our critic asks, "when were Elizabeth and 
Leicester again married?" This is answered in the Bi-literal 
Cypher (p. 154). 

A little farther on critic says : "If there had been a mar- 
riage, which there wasn't, sometime in the four months between 
Lady Dudley's (Amy Eobsart's) death and (the supposed) 
Bacon's birth, it would have legitimated Bacon; but then he 
would not have been a Tudor but a Dudley/' 

Bacon evidently considered himself legitimated by "this 
second nuptial rite," and when he wrote, probably knew quite 
as much of the law, and of the time the marriage took place, 
as our critic. It was not descent from Dudley that made him 
prince. Long-established custom was the law that gave "to 
the first borne of the sovereign the title of Prince of Wales." 

Our critic makes a point of the use and spelling of Brittain 
and of the expression 'in the throne,' quoting: "Ended now 
is my great desire to sit in the British throne." 

In the Advancement of Learning (1605) he may read: 

"Queene Elizabeth, your immediate Predecessor in this part of 

Brittalne (B. 1, p. 36) ; while in Shakespeare he will find: 

"Shall see me rising in my throne," R. II. 3-2; 

"When I do rouse me in my throne," H. V. 1-2; 

"But one imperious in another's throne," 1 H. VI. 3-1; 

"In that throne 

*Vhich now the house of Lancaster usurps,". .. .3 H. VI. 1-1; 

"nd shall I stand, and thou sit in my throne?". .3 H. VI. 1-1; 

"And see him seated in the regal throne," 3 H. VI. 4-3; 

"Once more we sit in England's royal throne,".. 3 H. VI. 5-7; 
"And plant your joys in living Edward's throne, "..R. III. 2-2; 

"We will plant some other in the throne," R. III. 3-7; 

"You are but newly planted in your throne," T. A. 1-1; 

"My bosom's lord sits lightly in his throne," R. & J. 5-1 

Our critic has not read his Shakespeare well, if he thinks 
the term unusual in Bacon's time. 



151 



He also objects to the phrase, "Every land in which the 
English language hath a place." Bacon wrote his cipher his- 
tory to be read, when deciphered, in all parts of the world. 
The reference to our colonies, etc., was a prophecy more than 
half realized even then, and he claimed for Elizabeth command 
of the sea which he called a "universal monarchy." 

Critic again quotes: "We spent our greatest labours in 
making cyphares' (a noble occupation!)" Certainly, and a 
natural one when seeking means of communicating important 
matters. Some one has suggested that instead of committing 
his secret history to ciphers, he should have written it out and 
confided the papers to the keeping of trusted literary execu- 
tors. But that w^ould have been the action of mature years, 
or of one who believed he was about to leave this life. Bacon 
then was an eager youth, hardly yet upon the threshold of 
manhood, and he believed his claims would ultimately be ac- 
knowledged. As to the nobleness of the occupation. Bacon 
says of it: "These Arts (cyphers) being here placed with the 
principal and supreame Sciences, seeme petty thinges: yet to 
such as have chosen them to spende their labours studies in 
them, they seem great Matters" — Adv. of Learn. B. 2, p. 61. 
(1605). 

Our critic states : "To the real Bacon Elizabeth's move- 
ments in January 1560-1 would have been known." 

To an infant of days? That is very good. These things 
became known to him in the way he states. 

Again, "Robert Cecil, at the period referred to, was about 
fourteen years of age." Critic must have copied this from 
Mr. Andrew Lang who makes the same mistake. The encyclo- 
paedias give the date of Robert Cecil's birth as 1550. He was 
therefore eleven years older than Bacon and about twenty-seven 
years of age when, Bacon says, he caused the tempestuous scene 
that resulted in the disclosure to Erancis that he was the son 
of the Queen. 

Then, "Hamlet was not in 1611 a new play." 

Could Bacon record in the types of a play then appearing 
for the first time, that it had "breasted the wave gallantly ?" 
Whatever the play or whenever it was "new," it could not be 
the 1611 edition of Hamlet. 

152 



The critic further says : "For Bacon's style we know — com- 
pact, well-built, grammatical, lucid; no feeble tautology, dilu- 
tions, or repetitions ; harmonious, and satisfying to the ear ; 
pregnant with meaning, and grateful to the intellect. But what 
about the Phantoms ? Here we find clumsy and sprawling- 
sentences of half a page, or nearly, with shambling subordinate 
clauses 'spatch-cocked' in between brackets or dashes" etc. 

Refer again to the Advancement of Learning (1605) : 

"Antonius Pius, who succeeded him, was a Prince ex- 
cellently learned ; and had the Patient and subtile witte of a 
Schoole man : insomuch as in common speech, (which leaves 
no vertue untaxed) hee was called Cymini Sector, a carver, or 
a divider of Comine seede, which is one of the least seedes: 
such a patience hee had and setled spirite, to enter into the 
least and most exact differences of causes ; a fruit no doubt of 
the exceeding tranquillitie, and serenitie of his minde: which 
being no wayes charged or incombred, either with feares, re- 
morses, or scruples, but having been noted for a man of the 
purest goodnesse without all fiction or affectation, that raigned 
or lived: made his minde continually present and entier: he 
likewise approached a degree neerer unto Christianitie, and 
became as Agrippa sayd unto S. Paule, Halfe a Christian; 
holding their Keligion and Law in good opinion: and not only 
ceasing persecution, but giving way to the advancement of 
Christians." (B. 1, p. 35). 

"Compact, well-built, lucid," "satisfying to the ear," "not 
clumsy, sprawling sentences of half a page" — and yet here is 
nearly a page before Bacon completed his period, and what 
about unity of subject? 

And again from the same work: 

"In which kind I cannot but mencion Honoris causa your 
Maiesties exellent book touching the duty of a king: a woorke 
ritchlye compounded of Divinity Morality and Policy, with 
great aspersion of all other artes: & being in myne opinion 
one of the moste sound & healthfvil writings that I have read: 
not distempered in the heat of invention nor in the Couldnes 
of negligence : not sick of Dusinesse as those are who leese them- 
selves in their order ; nor of Convulsions as those which Crampe 
in matters impertinent; not savoring of perfumes & paintings 
as those doe who seek to please the Reader more than N^ature 

153 



beareth, and chiefelye wel disposed in the spirits thereof, 
beeing agreeable to truth, and apt for action: and farre re- 
mooved from that Xatural infirmity, whereunto I noted those, 
that write in their own professions to be subject, which is, that 
they exalt it above measure." (B. 1, 2d p. 69). 

I quote again : 

'This kinde of degenerate learning did chiefely raigne 
amongst the Schoole-men, who having sharpe and stronge wits, 
and aboundance of leasure, and smal varietie of reading ; but 
their with being shut up in the Cels of a few Authors (chiefely 
Aristotle their Dictator) as their persons were shut up in the 
Cells of Monasteries and Colledges, and knowing little Historic, 
either of ISTature or time, did out of no great quantitie of mat- 
ter, and infinite agitation of wit, spin out unto us those labori- 
ous webbes of Learning which are extant in their Bookes," 
(B. 1, 2d p. 18). 

In eleven lines we are told that 'this kind of learning did 
reign among schoolmen who did spin out to us those webs of 
learning extant in their books.' 

Many such examples could be quoted, but these will suffice 
to show that this critic has not read Bacon well even in modern 
editions, and not at all in the old English of the original edi- 
tions. So slightly familiar is he with the great author, that 
he has failed to discriminate betwen the compact, forceful 
style of the Essays and Apothegms and the "clumsy, sprawling 
sentences," of his scientific works — a variation in the manner 
of writing so marked that one might think these were not 
from the same pen. 

Mr. Candler has kindly replied to the objection to the 
sentence, "Such things doth burn," but I will add other in- 
stances : "Which Religion and the holy faith doth conduct men 
unto" (A. of L. B. 2, 4th p. 69) ; "which the example and 
countenance of twoo so learned Princes. . . .hath wrought" 
(A. of L. B. 1, p. 11) ; "like Ants which is a wise creature for 
itself" (B. 2, St p. 93). 

Our critic next quotes : " 'Whilst writing these interior 
works these keies and joining words did deter [it means retard^ 
th' advancement' (pretty, to see keys and words writing)." 

On page 26 of the Advancement of Learning Bacon says: 
"For I am not ignorant howe much that diverteth and in- 

154 



terrupteth the prosecution and advancement of knowledge" ; 
and on page 27, "which hath not onely given impediment to 
the proficience of Learning." 

Preceding examples have shown want of unity in the sub- 
ject, but I will give an additional illustration to follow "whilst 
writing these interior works" etc. It is this: "Hearing that 
you are at leisure to peruse Stories a desire took me to make an 
Experiment, (Letter to the King). 

A little farther on the critic states: "Especially careful 
is the real Bacon in the use of the present conditional, (if, lest, 
tJio) it he, &c. ; but here we sometimes find may stuck in, — 
'Dread lest our secret history may be found out' ; 'ere the pleas- 
ure rnay disappear, ' " &c. 

In a letter to Essex (1598) the critic will find: "If the 
main conditions may be good." 

And again: "Sometimes a future indicative, 'If it shall 
not be (for he not) found.' " 

In a letter to the King we have: "If it shall be deprived"; 
in A. of L. (p. 5) "if any man shall thinke." 

Again : "Many of the Phantom's tautologies are positively 
imbecile, e.g.: 'Frequently, aye many a time' ; 'a narrative of 
a story' ; 'the play previously named or mentioned' ; 'very pleas- 
ing to such a degree' ; 'a most cleave playne ensample' ; 'fidmin'd 
lightning' ; 'a coming people in the future' ; and the like." 

In the History of Henry the Seventh is the peculiar com- 
bination, "then a young Youth" (p. 247) ; and in the Ad- 
vancement of Learning (1605) these lines: 'True bounds and 
limitations, whereby humane knowledge is confined, and cir- 
cumscribed: and yet without any such contraction or coarcta- 
tion" ; 'being steeped and infused in the humors of the affec- 
tions" ; "not referred to the good of Men and Mankind" (p. 
5) ; 'let men endeavour an endlesse progresse or proficience in 
both . . . and again that they doe not unwisely mingle or con 
found these learnings together" (p. 6) ; "the accuser of Socrates 
layd it as an Article of charge & accusation against him" ; "and 
to suppresse truth by force of eloquence and speech" ; "there 
hath beene a meeting, and concurrence" (p. 7) ; 'the modern 
loosenes or negligence ;" 'it is a thing personall and individ- 
nal" : 'have an influence and operation" (p. 13) ; 'to pierce 
and penetrate" (p. 15); "fit and proper for"; "can taxe or 

155 



condemme" (1st p. 16) ; "have sought to vaile over and con- 
ceale" (p. 22) ; "Man's owne individuall Nature (B. 2, p. 56) ; 
"which cannot but cease and stoppe all progression. For no 
perfect discoverie can bee made uppon a fiatte, or a levell" 
(p. 34) ; "which hath been likewise handled. But howe ? rather 
in a satyre & Cinicaly, then seriously & wisely for men 
have rather sought by wit to deride and traduce (B. 2, 1st p. 
77) ; "being set downe and strongly planted doth judge and 
determine most of the Controversies" (B. 2, p. 72) ; "For 
Narrations and Relations" (B. 2, p. 14) ; also "But as for the 
Narrations .... they are either not true, or not l^aturall ; and 
therefore impertinent for the Storie of Nature" (B. 2, 2d p. 6). 

Again "The real Bacon, as a pretty good classic, could not 
have spelt Illiad, spirrit, Brittain, Citty, instructted &c., with 
doubled consonants; or comon, suferd, &c., with a single one; 
and rarely, if ever, did he adopt that curious growth of tlie 
old genitive suffix (-es) — is into the detached possessive his 
(in imitation of which, her came to be similarly used) ; yet in 
the Phantom's twaddle instances abound — 'Essex his plea' ; 'the 
author his poems' ; 'the Queen her crown' ; &c., &c." 

In Love's Labours Lost (5-2) lUion; in Troilus and 
Cressida (1-2) Illium; in All's Well (3-5) Citty; in Ad- 
vancement of Learning (B. 2, p. 32) Brittaine; Book 2, (p. 
18) maner, comonly; (p. 36) canot; (p. 74) amogst, comand ; 
(p. 74) comoly; (p. 87) wisedom; and on page 92 circurence 
(circumference) . 

In printing the deciphered work, similar elisions when 
they occurred were marked with an apostrophe, the modern ab- 
breviation, rather than mar the page with such seeming errors. 

I have already given six examples from the History of 
Henry the Seventli of the detached possessive his, and many 
others could be cited. "A thing familiar in my Mistris her 
times" occurs in a letter to Northumberland ; "I. S. his day is 
past and well past" — Letter to the King (29th of April, 1615). 

"It needeth no proof of the fact that" is characterized as 
modern padding, but in Advancement of Learning we read, 
"where there is assurance and cleere evidence of the fact." 

Most, if not all the so-called modern expressions that have 
been criticized — including some noted by another critic — are 

156 



found (mildly, exciting, headings), and in 2 H. IV. (1-1) is 
the line, "You east the event of war." 

A prominent assertion is that concerning repetitions. 
Most overlook the fact that the cipher narrative was placed 
in a large number of books and at different dates. The contents 
of the Bi-literal Cypher of Francis Bacon were deciphered from 
fifty-five works, some of them subdivided into many separate 
parts, as in the Shakespeare First Folio and Ben Jonson's 
Folio. Bacon declares his reason for reiteration was that he 
could not know in which book the cipher would be discovered, 
nor could he suppose that it would be followed through all 
the works. 

The article concludes with a promise of more to follow — 
then I trust I may be granted space for further reply. 

Yours very sincerely, 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 

REPLY 11. 

To THE Editor of the Liteeaky World : 

Sir: — It is unnecessary to explain again the principles of 
the cipher I have set forth. Mr. Fulcher, Mr. Sinnett, Mr. 
Mallock, Mr. John Holt Schooling, the critic of the Literary 
World, and others, have done this with sufficient elaboration. 
Then, too, in De Augmentis Scientiarum they are fully illus- 
trated and clearly taught by the great inventor himself. 

Few realize that Bacon's own explanation was withheld 
until the very last of his career. Without the key, the cipher 
could not have been discovered, and in that lay liis safety. In 
that, too, the importance of the cipher was shown, for in stat- 
ing that he invented it in his youth, and explaining the same 
in his age, he set his seal upon it, so to speak, as something 
useful and worthy of preservation. 

And again, there is that very marked reference to this 
cipher in the 1605 edition of the Advancement of Learning — 
that "quintuple proportion" required in no other" — so that a 
summary gives us: Invented 1579, mentioned 1605, illustrated 
1623, employed a lifetime before it was explained, as I have 
now proved true by actual decipherment from fifty-five different 
books. 

157 



The critic states: "With respect to the Shakespeare Folio 
of 1623, Mr. Sidney Lee, the final authority, declares that no 
cipher exists in it. On this point, having examined a large 
number of detached passages up and down the volume, we can 
bear subsidiary testimony. Not but what there are many in- 
dividual non-normal letters," etc. 

These 'individual non-normal letters' can be separated 
into two distinct classes. The practical application of Bacon's 
invention was merely a selection of the different forms as far 
as they existed, and the production of others where there was a 
lack. In the cipher, this is clearly stated. There was no im- 
propriety in such an adaptation — of forms already existing — 
so long as in their use there was uniformity throughout each 
work. 

Our critic says, "ISTothing is more frequent than such mix- 
tures in books," but there should also be added, what I have 
learned to be true, that in Bacon's works the different founts 
were used with a system, have a rational dependence and con- 
nection, demonstrating the incorporation of the bi-literal cipher. 
He admits there was a careless use of the initial and interior 
forms, especially of the small v and w. 

This very fact assured Bacon that their methodical em- 
ployment would pass unnoticed. One form is consistently 
used as an 'a fount' letter, and the other as h, unless there be a 
printer's error, in which case it is easily corrected by the 
context. 

Our critic further states: "The book contains nearly 400 
pages. . .which must equal more than three million cipher let- 
ters, distributed it is asserted, over numerous old books printed 
in different years, by different printers," etc., and that "to 
deal reliably with the supposed 'normal' and 'twin' fonts re- 
quires a special training and experience." 

His estimate is approximately correct. Having examined 
with the care that was requisite — usually with a magnifying 
glass — every letter in that 'three million,' may I not say I am 
"fitted by experience" to differentiate the -forms, and that I 
Arnow whereof I speak ? 

I make no claim to genius but the 'genius of hard work,' 
nor to inspiration except that coming from success which gave 
me courage to persevere. 

158 



There has been a slight misunderstanding regarding the 
method of deciphering. Both ways suggested by the critic were 
tried in the beginning, as well as other methods, but the one 
finally adopted was found to be most expeditious. I have many 
times given this in detail, perhaps to some of your readers. 

The Italic letters of a page or two of the text were first 
copied in consecutive order by an operator using a typewriting 
machine that, arranged to space after each fifth letter, auto- 
matically formed the requisite cipher groups. When sufficient 
study had made me familiar with the forms and classification 
of letters in the book — sometimes a matter of days and even 
weeks — I placed a mark under the copied letters indicating the 
fount to which each Italic letter belonged. Tentative divisions 
were required to ascertain the correct grouping, and to deter- 
mine the starting point, but when these had been unmistakably 
found, the copying would be resumed and the sheets containing 
the transcribed Italics thus properly grouped — but always in 
their consecutive order as they stand in the books — M^ould be 
brought to me. 

Having in the meantime memorized the alphabets, I noted 
each 'h fount' letter and placed a stroke ( / ) under the cor- 
responding letter on the typewritten sheet. All the others, be- 
longing to the ^a fount,' were marked with a short dash under- 
neath, by an assistant, and the resulting bi-literal letter was then 
set down. This was the MS. to which I referred, and it is of 
this that ''critic" facetiously asks : ''What need of MSS. if the 
cypher was already embodied in the printed texts ?" 

Had he been at all familiar with ciphers he would have 
known they are not to be read at a glance. They are purposely 
made obscure, and are designed to be impossible to decipher 
by those not possessing the key, and difficult in any case. 

Before reviewers cite Mr. Lee as authority upon the 
cipher, they should know whether or not his premises are 
correct. Mr. Lee says: "Italic and Roman types are never in- 
termingled in the manner that would be essential if the words 
embodied Bacon's bi-literal cypher." — this shows, as I have 
before pointed out, in print and otherwise, that Mr. Lee misap- 
prehends the essentials. The Eoman and Italic types are 
not intermingled to form bi-literal letters. From 1579 to 
1623, a period of forty-four years, no Roman type was employ- 

159 



ed for cipher purposes. On pages 66-67 of the Bi-literal Cypher 
reference is made to their use in a few short passages, only, of 
the later publications — the preliminary pages of the First Folio, 
and of Vitae et Mortis, etc. Mr. Lee is, therefore, not good 
authority, because he does not understand the principles of 
the cipher, and, drawing his conclusion from false premises, 
declares the cipher non-existent that I know does exist. 

My critic says : "Just as in the Spenserian passage, the 
Gallupian &-type has been somehow introduced into the repro- 
duced text [of the Novum Organum^ so as to give the desired 
cipher-groups : but how, and by whom ?" 

If he refers to the ^b type' of the photographic facsimiles, 
it is a frank acknowledgment that he can see the differences in 
the types. He could, therefore, become a cipher expert if he 
chose. The "^^-type' was introduced when the originals were 
printed, the one in 1620, the other in 1591. 

If the reference is to the passages that were set up in 
modern type by our printers, for the purpose of illustrating 
the method of deciphering, the answer is in the statement it- 
self. The two founts were purposely selected with differences 
sufficiently marked to be apparent to the dullest vision 

The facsimiles were omitted from the third edition of the 
book, not because they proved too much but too little. In spite 
of the care taken to secure accuracy, some distinctive differ- 
ences were lost, and, as a consequence, deciphering from the 
reproductions, was much more difficult than from the originals, 
therefore not suited to novices in the art. 

Our critic makes a misstatement in saying that one section 
of the book "purports to be a translation of Homer's Iliad made 
by Bacon and buried in cipher in Burton's 'Anatomy of Melan- 
choly.' " 

This section is fully explained to be but an epitome — 
argument. Bacon calls it — of the chief events, with the names 
of the principal characters, to be used as a guide and frame- 
work of the fuller translation. The complete poem is embodied 
in the works and is to be extracted by means of the word- 
cipher, a very different method. Our critic also repeats the 
baseless aspersion made by Mr. Marston that the Argument is 
a prose paraphrase of Pope's translation. I have, in replying 

160 



to Mr. Marston's criticism of my work, fully refuted this 
charge, and I repeat that it is wholly without foundation. 

That our critic understands little of the books he reviews, 
is apparent in his reference to the method of constructing the 
Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, and this requires that I again ex- 
plain the difference of method in the two ciphers. The bi- 
literal is in the Italic letters of the original volumes — in two 
founts or forms of type — and has been extracted letter by letter, 
separated into cipher groups of five, and the result set down. 
The word-cipher is much more elaborate, and consists in a 
reconstructing of the history, poem, or drama that had been 
disseminated through the works. Words, phrases, and passages, 
pertaining to the same subject, are brought together by the 
keys and joining- words, and in this new sequence relate an 
entirely different story. Yet this interior history is the origi- 
nal. If our critic had thoroughly read the introductory 
pages of the Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, he would have under- 
stood that the lines were taken bodily from Henry VIII — 
and the 107 other works — in accordance with this clear and 
definite plan. The "argument" or synopsis, 'framework' if he 
pleases, of this Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, is given in the Bi- 
literal Cypher to aid in collecting the scattered passages, as the 
Argument of the Iliad is given to aid in gathering the scattered 
fragments of the fuller translation of the great Greek poem. 
Some of the fragments of this work are in the text of the 
Anatomy of Melancholy, but it is seldom that many consecu- 
tive lines are found there. The following will however be 
recognized : — "Pandarus, Lycaon's son, when he shot at Mene- 
laus the Grecian with a strong arm and deadly arrow, Pallas 
as a good mother keeps flies from her child's face asleep, 
turned by the shaft, and made it hit on the buckle of his girdle." 
— Part, ii. Sect, iii, Mem. iii. Many of the proper names are 
also found in the Anatomy of Melancholy. These fragments 
of the Iliad are scattered throughout all the works, but the 
largest portions are to be found in Greene's prose. I am ex- 
plicit regarding this because so few understand that Bacon re- 
fers to the poem in the word-cipher, when he mentions works 
that contain portions of Homer. 

Some writers, too, who have become acquaintied with 
Bacon's bi-literal cipher, are not equally familiar with the 

161 



word-cipher, although it is mentioned in the Advancement of 
Learning (1605) in the first lines of the paragraph on ciphers: 
''For Cyphers they are commonly in Letters or Alphabets but 
may be in Wordes." Bacon chose an epistle of Cicero for the 
illustration of the bi-literal, and it appears that it was in that 
philosopher's writings that he found the suggestion of the word- 
cipher plan, for he says: "And Cicero himself e being broken 
unto it by great experience, delivereth it plainely ; That whatso- 
ever a man shall have occasion to speak of, (if he will take the 
paines) he may have it in effect premediate, and handled in 
these. So that when hee commeth to a particular, he shall have 
nothing to doe but to put too ISTames, and times, and places ; 
and such other Circumstances of individuals." 

Bacon saw how the lines of history, or drama, or trans- 
lation could be separated and used in more than one place, 
and his invention consisted in the use of certain key-words that 
marked the passages belonging together. By making use of 
these in the original works, and taking the work apart by the- 
same keys that must be used in reassembling the portions, his 
idea was successfully carried out. To guard against mistakes, 
and to make the work less laborious to the decipherer, he gave 
short "arguments" of the hidden work, as well as the keys, in 
this auxiliary bi-literal cipher. 

It is an error, then, to suppose that the sections are not 
brought together "in any rational order." 

It would of course be possible to give the entire interior 
play or poem in a single work, but this was not Bacon's plan ; 
and he adopted a very ingenious manner of directing the deciph- 
erer by guide-words to the different works, containing the scat- 
tered sections. 

This disseminating of the original work that was to be 
brought together again by this cipher, caused the anachronisms 
in the plays — the dispersing of the Armada in King John, 
Cleopatra's billiards, artillery before it was in use, etc. — but it 
enabled him to hide his principal and dangerous history, as 
well as other important writings, to be collected again at a safe 
distance of time and place, and the end justified the means. 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 



162 



MR. DANA AND "MATTOIDS." 

Ed. N. Y. Times, Saturday Review : 

Under the caption, "Shakespeare and Bacon. Writers 
about them are not exactly lunatics — their cypher essentially a 
mattoid product." — Mr. Charles L. Dana gives what purports 
to be a review of a book recently published, "The Bi-literal 
Cypher of Francis Bacon." * 

This cipher I had the fortune to discover, as it exists in 
the original editions of the works of that great author, and I 
have deciphered and given to the public what is contained in 
the volume referred to, hence come under the classification 
which the gentleman seems to impose upon a very considerable 
number of students and fellow-writers. 

I hope Mr. Dana does not intend to be rude, but it seems 
to me that he has unnecessarily gone out of his way in applying 
epithets to people who differ from him in certain literary con- 
clusions, and as the class, which he condemns for such differing 
opinion, is a large and growing one, and embraces names and 
persons even in his own city — judges, lawyers, newspaper men, 
etc. — the peers of Mr. Dana in intelligence, whom he would not 
dare personally to face with such aspersions as he indulges in 
print, he shows himself inconsistent as well as reckless. As a 
specimen of inconsistency, I quote from his opening paragraph : 
"The question (Bacon vs. Shakespeare), however, continued to 
be agitated or, rather, advocated, because few scholars regarded 
it seriously. Some men of note, if not of learning, took it up, 
and Lord Palmerston is said to have been a convert." Certainly 
this is eminently respectable company. 

Near the close of the article, speaking of those who believe 
that Sir Francis Bacon produced a much larger part of the 
literature of the world than is accredited to him, and dare offer 
evidence of it, he says : "They are not exactly lunatics, for the 
characteristic of lunacy is weakness." I suppose we should be 
thankful, therefore, that, by the gentleman's saving grace, we 
are not "lunatics, characterized by weakness." 

163 



Mr. Dana goes on to say: "Such people have received the 
scientific name of mattoids" — a word apparently borrowed from 
the Italian alienist, Lombroso, as it is not found in many dic- 
tionaries or encyclopedias. If euphemistic, a critic like Mr. 
Fisk, uses the expression "eccentric" ; if addicted to slang, 
another would say, "cranks." The use made, in the article, of 
this term "mattoids," is to designate those who have "obses- 
sions" — doing things "under the domination of an idea, which 
is, as a rule, foolish" — in Mr. Dana's estimation, 

' There can hardly be an "obsession" greater than to declare 
things do not exist, because the individual is unable to com- 
prehend their presentation, 

"Your opinion, my opinion, any man's opinion, is the 
measure of his knowledge." If a man's knowledge is ample 
and accurate, his opinions are entitled to consideration. Mr. 
Dana's knowledge of the bi-literal cipher is evidently neither 
ample nor accurate. The fact is that the presentation in the 
book he criticises is by fac-simile pages from the original 
Latin edition of De Augmentis Scientarium, published by 
Bacon in 1624, and by a verbatim reproduction of the first 
English translation of the work, published in 1640. This 
cipher is explained for the first time in 1623 Latin edition, 
though invented by Bacon in 1579, and used during the re- 
mainder of his life. The explanation is Bacon's own, and this 
cipher has been the basis of the most important cipher systems 
that are in use in the world today. 

Another thing that strikes me as inconsistent in the 
writer, and that lays his article open to his own characteriza- 
tion of "weak logic, stupendous misrepresentation, and erratic 
conduct," is this: The value of a critique is in telling some- 
thing of the subject criticised that will be of value to readers. 
Mr. Dana fails to make a single quotation, controvert a single 
proposition w^hich the book contains or give a special reason 
for disbelief in the historical facts that have come to light 
through the Cipher. It is simply his ipse dixit that the Cipher 
does not exist except in the imagination of the decipherer. 

Is it profound criticism which exliausts itself in hurling 
anathemas and vituperation ? The creed of space writers in 
the newspapers, when attacking things Baconian, seems to be 
that, as with the first man, Adam, sin came upon all mankind, 

164 



the insanity of Delia Bacon, who was the first Baconian, was 
transmitted to all her successors, and that is the end of the 
argument. 

I think it only fair to the readers of the Times that 
something should be said on the subject, and of the book itself, 
which has led to the discovery of "mattoids" among the authors 
of things not to Mr. Dana's taste, first saying that, personally, 
I have to confess to mature years, and no little experience in 
educational work, preliminary and preparatory to which was 
quite a thorough course of educational training in our own 
country, supplemented by a considerable period of study, in 
France and Germany. 

Long before I had more than a passing and superficial 
knowledge of Bacon's Bi-literal Cipher, I had observed what 
all careful students of Elizabethan literature have noted and 
remarked upon in the original editions, that the Italic letters 
in some of the books were in two or more forms. Later, when 
an original De Augmentis came into my hands, I saw there 
a clear explanation and elaborate illustration of a cipher that 
required simply a biformed alphabet. Bacon there speaks of 
the time of its invention as in his youthful days while in Paris. 
It is first mentioned in his Advancement of Learnitig, pub- 
lished in 1605, with a hint of its importance. This was 
twenty-five years after its invention. Eighteen years later 
still, in 1623, we find it fully elaborated, at no small cost 
and pains, this still further emphasizing its value after forty- 
three years of time. These facts, in themselves, would sug- 
gest that the originator had tested its practicability. The 
discovery of its application to the Italic letters in differing 
forms in the original editions of Bacon's works, has proved 
that it was made the medium (in no "spiritualistic" way) for 
the transmission of those secrets concerning Bacon, without 
the revelation of which many things in his life seemed obscure 
and paradoxical. 

Seven years of time have I given to the study of Bacon 
and his ciphers — not as a dilettante, desultorily, as a means 
of recreation or use of spare moments — but as a student in 
the hardest, most conscientious sense of the word. A study 
which has been a weariness to the brain and destructive to 

165 



eyesight. Has Mr. Dana given seven days, or even hours, 
to real research ? 

As Bacon said in his History of King Henry VII. 
"We shall make our judgment upon the things themselves, as 
they give light one to another, and (as we can) dig truth out 
of the mine." 

Spurred on by the fascination of an important discovery, 
and by its development, as the concealed story was unfolded, 
letter by letter, word by word, revealing the hidden life, the 
secret thoughts and emotions of that great mind and person- 
ality, concerning which but the half has been known, I have 
examined over seven thousand pages of rare and priceless old 
original editions, placed at my disposal by the courtesy of 
private collectors in this country and in England, or found 
in our public libraries, and in that greatest of all receptacles 
of literary treasures, the British Museum. Every Italic letter 
on those seven thousand pages has been set down in its proper 
group, classified according to the rules of the Cipher, and the 
peculiar characteristics of each letter studied until they became 
as familiar as the face of a friend. The results of the 
deciphering so far published fill three hundred and sixty-eight 
pages of the book under discussion. It would be a vivid imag- 
ination, indeed, that could create an historical narrative such 
as the Cipher reveals. I have earned the right to speak with 
confidence of what this research has brought to light. I here 
repeat a paragraph of the personal preface to the First 
Edition : 

I appreciate what it means to. ask strong minds to change 
long-standing literary convictions, and of such I venture to 
ask the withholding of judgment until study shall have made 
the new matter familiar, with the assurance meanwhile, upon 
my part, of the absolute veracity of the work which is here 
presented. ... I would beg that the readers of this book shall 
bring to the consideration of the work, minds free from preju- 
dice, judging of it with the same intelligence and impartiality 
they would themselves desire if the presentation were their 
own. Otherwise the work will, indeed, be a thankless task. 

In conclusion, and I speak from knowledge gained at 
fearful cost, I say with the utmost positiveness, that there is 
no more doubt as to the existence of both the Word Cypher, 

168 



and the Bi-literal Cypher, in the works of Francis Bacon, nor 
as to his authorship of the Shakespeare Plays, and certain 
other works accredited to other names, than there is as to the 
existence of stars which only students of astronomy have 
known. 

So long as the "Baconian theory" remained a matter of 
literary opinion merely, all had a right to their own, but no 
one has the right to place his prepossessions against facts which 
he has not properly investigated, and then charge that the 
result of the careful investigations of others leads to "stupen- 
dous misrepresentations" and to "mattoidal products." 

Elizabeth W. Gallup. 



167 



CORRESPONDENCE IN THE -TIMES" 



COMMU^^ICATIONS TO THE "TIMES.'* 

London. 

BACOK— SHAKESPEAEE. 

To THE Editor of the Times : 

Sir : — Many of the writers who, in your own columns and 
elsewhere, have been lately expressing their views with re- 
gard to the bi-literal Cipher alleged to exist in the Eirst Folio of 
Shakespeare have spoken of me as a convert to Mrs. Gallup's 
theory. I am not so. I am a convert only to the view that her 
theory is suflSciently plausible to deserve to have its truth 
tested. Regarded as a subject of inquiry, its great merit lies 
in the fact that its truth or falsehood can be ascertained by 
purely mechanical means, such as photographic enlargements 
of the text, coupled with a systematic examination of them. 
I stated this opinion in my article in the Nineteenth Century. 
Pending such an examination, which I intend to undertake 
myself, other arguments appear to me a waste of time. They 
are like arguments as to whether a piece of plate has been 
hidden in a locked-up cupboard, when the sensible course to 
pursue is to pick the lock and see. Mr. Sidney Lee's letters 
seem to me to contain little but statements — no doubt true — 
as to the extent of his own learning, and urbane intimations 
that all persons who differ from him are half-witted mono- 
maniacs. With regard to the general question of the author- 
ship of the Shakespeare Plays the monomaniacs are those who 
consider any doubt of Shakespeare's authorship unreasonable. 
The main grounds on which, so far as I know, a doubt of his 
authorship rests are grounds which suggest themselves to the 
common sense of an ordinary man of the world, and arise 
from the few details ascertainable with regard to Shakespeare's 
life, as put before us by writers like Mr. Lee himself. The 
mere genius displayed in the Plays offers no difficulty. The 
difficulty consists in the kind of knowledge displayed in them. 
This simple fact Mr. Lee seems wholly unable to appreciate, 
as the illustrations he adduces in your issue of December 27 

169 



show. He says that to doubt that Shakespeare wrote the Plays 
ascribed to hira is like entertaining a similar doubt with regard 
to Keats or Dickens, because both these writers, like Shake- 
speare, the butcher's son, were also born in comparatively hum- 
ble circumstances. The whole point of the question escapes 
Mr. Lee altogether. The poetry of Keats displays no knowl- 
edge whatever the possession of which would be singular in a 
person situated as he was, and having similar tastes ; whilst 
the knowledge displayed in the works of Dickens is not only 
not inconsistent with what we know of his life, but is, alike 
in its extent and its limitations, an accurate reflection of his 
opportunities for observation, and of his experiences. It is 
precisely because the case of Shakespeare, in this respect, 
instead of being parallel to that of Keats and Dickens, as 
Mr. Lee supposes, is in striking contrast to it that a doubt as 
to the possibility of his having written the works ascribed to 
him has arisen; and if Mr. Lee does not understand this 
initial fact — as it would seem he does not — he is, as yet, 
despite all his scholarship, hardly in a position to describe the 
doubts of those who differ from him as groundless. It is 
perfectly true that the question has another side. Mr. Lee's 
error lies in his assumption that it has only one side. 

With regard to his boast that he has collated 25 copies 
of the First Folio, this fact is altogether irrelevant unless he 
has collated them with a view to examining the forms of the 
Italic letters used, with a view to testing the truth of Mrs. 
Gallup's theory. This, I gather, he has not done, for the simple 
reason that he does not seem to have taken the trouble to inform 
himself accurately what her theory is. He tells us that the 
Roman type employed in the First Folio is all from one fount, 
as if this fact touched the position of Mrs. Gallup ; whereas 
what Mrs. Gallup alleges is that the Cipher is confined en- 
tirely to the Italic portions of the text, and that the other por- 
tions have nothing whatever to do with it. If he had said 
that he thought the question not worth inquiring into, his 
position would have been quite intelligible ; but to express, as 
he has done, a vehement opinion with regard to it, without 
hiaving given it more than a passing and prejudiced attention, 
is not a course which reflects much credit on his critical 
judgment. 



170 



For myself, I should be prepared to accept one solution 
of the problem or the other with the same equanimity. Either, 
in its own way, would be equally interesting. If Mrs. Gallup's 
theory is altogether false, the manner in which it has been 
elaborated will form a curious incident in literary history. 
Should it prove true, it will be more curious still. But what 
strikes me principally in this controversy is the odd senti- 
mental acerbity with which the upholders of Shakespeare's 
authorship receive the arguments of those who presume to 
entertain a doubt of it. Shakespeare is a figure of interest to 
us only because we assume him to have written the works that 
bear his name. What we know of him otherwise tends to 
quench interest rather than arouse it. What reason is there, 
other than the most foolish form of school-girl sentiment, for 
resenting the idea of a transference of our admiration of the 
author of the Plays from a man who is personally a complete 
stranger to us — or at best a not very reputable acquaintance — 
to a man who is universally admitted to be one of the greatest 
geniuses who have ever appeared at any period of the world's 
history ? 

I am. Sir, your obedient servant, 

W. H. Mallock. 



171 



THE BACON-SHAKESPEARE CYPHER. 

To THE EdITOK of THE TiMES : 

Sir: — Since you have allowed a critic of Mrs. Gallup's 
interpretation of the "Bi-literal Cipher" to cast discredit on the 
whole of her work on the strength of having discovered (what 
he thinks) one flaw in it, surely you will allow a believer in 
"the Bacon-Shakespeare craze" to put forward a few words 
in reference to the "Shakespeare-Stratford superstition." 

There are two schools of thinkers in reference to that 
superstition, those who have studied the matter and those who 
have not. The former are Baconians. Talking recently with a 
devotee of the superstition, I said: "Surely, if you say that, 
you cannot have seriously considered . . . such and such 
points." His answer was, "I would rather hang myself than 
seriously consider anything so atrocious." That is a common 
attitude of mind, and the reason why, as yet, only a minority 
of Englishmen possessing an unusual degree of culture are 
fully aware of the fact that Francis Bacon wrote the Plays 
published under the name of Shakespeare. The argument 
derived from the contents of the Promus containing 1,700 
private memoranda in Bacon's handwriting, all of which are 
used up by him later on in the Plays, the argument derived 
from the manner in which the Plays, in the order of their 
appearance, reflect the incidents of Bacon's life, the little 
circumstance that 11 of the best known Plays were never 
acted, published, or heard of till seven years after Shake- 
speare's death are a few of the reasons which influence the 
belief of those attached to "the craze." A few of the reasons 
why the superstition appears so comically absurd to them have 
reference to the fact that there is no shadow of reason for sup- 
posing that the Stratford boy — apprenticed to his father as a 
butcher at 14 — ever acquired the art, then very unusual among 
people in his rank of life — the art of writing. ISTeither his 
parents nor his children ever learned to write. He learned 

172 



in later life to scrawl something resembling a signature, not 
the bad writing of a literary man, but the hesitating, vague 
scratching of one who hardly knew how to hold the pen. After 
a few years spent as tradesman's assistant in a vortex of ignor- 
ance, the boy ran away to London and, according to the super- 
stition, immediately wrote Loves Labour s Lost, The Taming 
of the Shreiv, and The Two Gentlemen of Verona, which were 
brought out the year he came to London. The ridiculous 
souffles of imagination presented to the world by the orthodox 
biographers of Shakespeare are all based upon the authors' 
theories as to what "probably took place" or what "must have 
happened" because Shakespeare wrote the Plays. 

It is impossible to deal intelligently with the cipher story 
till one has first of all escaped from the trammels of the super- 
stition. Let people new to the subject be assured ,to begin with, 
that, without touching a scrap of evidence having to do with 
ciphers, those who "seriously consider" the question approach 
the discussion of ciphers from the point of view of knowing 
that the Shakespeare idea is pure, idiotic nonsense, and that 
Bacon, of course, wrote the Plays. Then, as regards Mrs. 
Oallup's Cipher, the question is simply this: Has she built 
up the whole of this long story out of her own head as a con- 
scious literary fraud, or, "errors and omissions excepted," is 
it to be accepted as genuine ? There is no halting-place between 
those two views. J^ow Mrs. Gallup did not work alone. She 
■was assisted by quite a group of people of unequivocal posi- 
tion and respectability, she was eager to invite the observa- 
tion of witnesses while engagd for six months at the British 
Museum deciphering the present story, and the fraud hypothe- 
sis becomes, for those who will take the trouble to make them- 
selves acquainted even in an elementary way with the facts, 
utterly untenable. The way to deal with it is to check Mrs. 
Oallup's work. If the Cipher is verifiable to any appreciable 
degree — as Mr. Marston even seems to admit, as Mr. Mallock 
has definitely stated — its verification by a responsible commit- 
tee will displace the whole subject from the region of contro- 
A^ersy and put "the Bacon-Shakespeare craze" on a level with 
that which brought Galileo into so much bad odour with ortho- 
doxy when he maintained that the earth went round the sun. 



173 



As for the curious flaw Mr. Marston has detected in the 
Iliad translation, we can afford to wait for Mrs. Gallup's expla- 
nation. If the whole problem rested on Mrs. Gallup's good 
faith, the flaw might seem supicious, but it rests on the shape 
of letters in books at the British Museum. In itself it is the 
biggest literary problem ever set before the world ; the prima 
facie case is overwhelming, as every one who has studied the 
question knows full well. How is it possible that a dreary, 
senseless old prejudice should be allowed to stand in the way 
of the truth ? Who among those in a position to do this effect- 
ively will undertake the duty of organizing a really competent 
committee (including some persons, at all events, who have 
studied the subject) to determine once for all to what author- 
ship the greatest writings in the English language are to be 
assigned ? As for little difficulties about dates, they will have 
to give way if the cipher story is verified. 

A. P. SiNNETT. 
27, Leinster-gardens, W„ Dec. 20, 1901. 



174 



BACONIAN CYPHEE. 

To THE Editor of the Times: 

Sir: — Prompted by Mr. Marston's letter, one of your 
leader writers makes an insinuation against Mrs. Gallup 
"which gallantry forbids us to state." 

The lady, unlike E. L. Stevenson, is alive and able to 
deal with innuendos of this sort. 

That Pope had access to the MS. of Lord Bacon's version 
is not unlikely, or that he saw an earlier deciphering from the 
Anatomy. Both Eawley and Ben Jonson were alive in 1628 
and wrote the Cipher, 

Apart from this, the phrases in the passage in question 
which are common to both poets were not new at the date 
Pope wrote. 

"Silver fountain" is in the Shakespeare Play of 
Richard II., Act 5, Sc. 3 ; "hoary-headed' in Midsummer 
Night's Dream, Act 2, Sc. 1 ; and "Titan rays" in Titus 
Andronicus, Act 1, Sc. 2. 

May I humbly correct your "leader" ? 

The Cipher not only mentions a marriage ceremony in 
the Tower, but a ceremony in September after the death of 
Dudley's wife, at a time when, according to Mother Dowe, of 
Brentwood (see "Calendar of State Papers for August, 1560"), 
marriage was very necessary. 

The Cipher does not say it took Francis four decades of 
interval to get over his affection for Margaret of Navarre, but 
that: "Not until four decades or eight lustres o' life were out- 
lived did I take any other to my sore heart. Then I married" 
— that, is to say, did not marry until after his 40th year. 

If Mr. Marston had imitated the caution of Mr. W. H. 
Mallock, instead of rushing into print directly he believed him- 
self in a position to impugn Mrs. Gallup's hona -fides, your 
leader writer would have been less fluttered. 
Yours obediently, 

Parker Woodward. 
King-street, Nottingham. 

175 



FRANCIS BACON AND THE CIPHER. 

To THE Editor of the Times: 

Sir: — ^We may hope that the truth in this matter may 
be established now that The Times is seriously facing the 
problem, even though at first your sympathies lean heavily 
against what Baconians conceive to be the truth. 

May I ask your contributor who has been investigating 
the Cipher whether, apart from defects and irregularities in 
Mrs. Gallup's interpretation, he has found any fairly consid- 
erable number of cipher words to correspond with her inter- 
pretation. No one could weave the cipher into a mass of print 
without making a multitude of mistakes. In ordinary hand- 
writing we most of us slur over scores of the letters we intend 
to form legibly, but if our readers can read the majority and 
see what we mean they do not reject the whole because of the 
defective bits. Of course the double types confuse the perfec- 
tion of the Cipher, but Bacon seems to have deliberately aimed 
at confusion, fearing premature discovery. Thus some cipher 
students tell me that after getting on fairly well for a time, 
they will suddenly find that, though the two kinds of type still 
appear, there is no sense to be made of them, until they dis- 
cover that, from the appearance of a particular mark until its 
reappearance, the significance of the a and h founts is reversed. 
With this clue, that which was at first confusion becomes lumi- 
nous with sense again. But, though no newcomer to the work 
can hope to read the Cipher successfully throughout, if a new- 
comer finds, for example, that he can identify four or five out 
of every dozen words that Mrs. Gallup can identify, surely 
that will dismiss the theory that such identities can be acci- 
dental to the region in which chances are expressed by millions 
to one against accident. For the rest, of course, Mrs. Gallup 
may have arbitrarily interpreted diphthongs and double types 
to suit the sense of the passage, as any one in dealing with writ- 
ing would interpret a scrawl at the end of a word as sometimes 
meaning "ing," sometimes "ly," according to sense. Or when 

176 



she has found a long word like (say) "interpretation" to come 
out — i, n, then a group of five letters you can make nothing of, 
then r, p, and the rest of the word right, of course she puts 
down the whole word "interpretation." Or perhaps the latter 
half of the wDrd will come out right only by curtailing some 
previous group of some of its proper letters; then, of course, 
the sensible thing to do is to curtail them accordingly. That 
is the principle to be adopted if we want to get at truth; and 
if we find i, n, right and p, r, e, t, a, t, i, o, n right, it would 
surely be silly to cavil at the absence of the t, e, r, or at any 

sort of confusion in the beginning 

"Apart from the Cipher," there are floods of reasons for 
disbelieving that Shakespeare could have written the Plays. 
Genius, alowing that hypothesis, might have given him lofty 
and beautiful thoughts, but no genius would have given him 
detailed familiarity with Chancery law and foreign languages, 
nor with the contents of Bacon's commonplace book, which 
must have been in the possession of the author of the Plays, 
But it is miserably unjust to the arguments on the Baconian 
side to hint at them in such few words as these. The "ignor- 
ance" in this connection is to be found rather amongst those 
who idly accept the old tradition than in the camp of those who 
are endeavouring to clear from foul slanders the memory of 
one whom they regard as the greatest Englishman who ever 
lived and the rightful sovereign of our literary allegiance. We 
make a formidable claim on such men as Mr. Sidney Lee when 
we ask them to abandon a tradition around which they have 
woven a great mass of ingenious imagination in the effort to 
account for that which Emerson found unaccountable — the 
contrast between the little that is actually known of Shake- 
speare and the works assigned to him. "Other admirable men 
have led lives in some sort of keeping with their thought, but 
this man in wide contrast.' But the glory of leading the homage 
that has so long been misdirected to the right shrine will 
surely be worth the sacrifice. 

A. P. SiNNETT. 
27, Leinster-gardens, W., Dec. 26, 1901. 



FRANCIS BACON'S BI-LITERAL CYPHER. 



Surprise has been expressed that I have not more fully 
replied to the many severe and unjust criticisms of my work — 
the discovery and publication of the Bi-literal Cypher of Francis 
Bacon. On account of great distance causing lapse of time, 
the torrent of communications, which deluged the Times and 
other papers and magazines in London, had somewhat sub- 
sided before my replies to any could be returned to England, 
but the delay, although by no fault of ours and unavoidable, 
has not been due to distance alone. 

The Times published two short letters with fair promptness. 
The Literary World gave space to two others, replying to 
articles appearing in its own columns ; and the Daily Neivs, 
of April 30, contained a part of my answer to Sir Henry 
Irving. An article in reply to some of the critics, prepared for 
the Pall Mall Magazine, could not, from prearrangement of 
space, appear until May — a rather late date. The delay was 
the more regretted because the article on the general subject, 
published in the March number of the same magazine, was 
prepared and sent forward before the criticisms of the latter 
part of December and January had reached me, and, though 
following shortly after, was in no way a reply. 

In the January number of the Nineteenth Century and 
After, there appeared two articles of attack upon the Cypher, 
one by Mr. Candler, and one by Mr. R. B. Marston. Mr. 
Marston, I understand, is a member of the firm publishing the 
magazine. His article was a continuation of the unfounded 
and libelous charges appearing in the Publishers' Circular and 
in the Times concerning myself and my work. I replied at 
length and forwarded the articles to Messrs. Gay & Bird, under 
date of February 5th, desiring that the denial of these charges 
should be given equal prominence. Electrotype plates were 
forwarded for illustration of the technical portions. Plates for 

179 



fac-simile pages from the two editions of De Augmentis, 
affording most interesting illustration of the method of the 
cipher and of the differences between the editions of 1623 
and 1624, were also furnished. I am now advised by Messrs. 
Gay & Bird that the Nineteenth Century, the Contemporary 
Review, and the Times, have declined to publish any part of 
these articles. 

This must be my apology for now issuing in pamphlet form 
what was prepared for the public periodicals and should have 
appeared months ago as part of the discussion of the subject 
that is of interest to a large number of readers. The reluctance 
of the press in general, to print anything Baconian is well illus- 
trated in this refusal of my critics to give place to my replies. 
I do not think it should be considered a waste of space ^(i 
discuss discoveries that correct history in important particulars. 
The cipher is a fact, and cannot be ignored. It is neither 
imagination nor creation of mine. It is a part of the history 
of England, and effort should be directed to further investiga- 
tions along the lines it indicates — to search among old MSS., 
in the museums and libraries and in the archives of the gov- 
ernment, for other facts which in the light of the cipher revela- 
tions will be better understood than they have been in the past. 

Concerning my reply to Mr. Marston's charges, I am in 
receipt of the Literary World of May 2nd, which over his 
name has the following: 

"Dear Sir : — I will not waste your space replying 
at length to Mrs. Gallup, except to ask her where she 
has replied to my article in The Nineteenth Century 
for January, and to my letters in The Times f 

*'In your columns and in the May number of The 
Pall Mall Magazine Mrs. Gallup says she has elseivhere 
replied to my request for an explanation of the fact 
that many passages in what she says is Bacon's transla- 
tion of Homer are identical with Pope's Homer pub- 
lished more than 200 years afterward ! . . . . 

"In a letter in The Times Mrs. Gallup did suggest 
that Bacon and Pope had used some edition of Homer 
unknoivn to any one else." 

In the above we note the strange inconsistency of Mr. 
Marston, for my letter published in the Times did not "sug- 
gest" or even refer to any edition of Homer whatever. His 

180 



reference is to a paragraph in my reply (printed herewith) to 
his baseless aspersions, and shows conclusively that he had 
read my refutation, and knew that in the article submitted to 
his magazine and rejected I had "elsewhere replied" to his 
request. 

In the article next preceding Mr, Marston's letter, "Re- 
viewer" also states: "Now as to Homer, I have read Mrs. 
Gallup's 'answer' to Mr. Marston," etc. 

This indicates that both Mr. Marston and "Reviewer" had 
examined my article, and they comment upon specific portions 
of it before it has been published, while ordinary courtesy 
should have withheld criticism, at least until the article had 
appeared in print. 

It may not be inopportune to report at this time the results 
of researches made for me at the British Museum and else- 
where, since Mr. Marston's malicious charge of "paraphrasing 
Pope's translation of the Iliad" was made. Fourteen transla- 
tions in Latin, French, German, Italian and English, pub- 
lished before 1620, were carefully examined for the reading in 
the disputed passages. Bacon's "impatient arrow" is "eager 
shaft" in Chapman's translation, and "long distance shots" is 
rendered "his hitting so far off," the Greek words conveying 
the same idea to these two minds. Mr. Marston matched 
Bacon's "cold Dodona" against Pope's "cold Dodona," but 
Hobbes has "Dodona cold," and a modern Greek scholar ren- 
ders it "chilly Dodona." He also pairs "rocky Aulis" with the 
same in Pope, but gives it as the literal translation also; and 
he places Bacon's "he leapt to the ground" opposite Pope's 
"leaps upon the ground," while it is more like the line of 
Hobbes, "he leapt to land." Another renders this "he leap'd 
to the land," and still another, "he leaped upon the earth." 

The examination also developed the fact that Pope's orig- 
inal MSS., preserved at the Museum, have closer resemblances 
to Bacon's Argument of the Iliad than are found in Pope's 
published work. This is very significant, and in itself refutes 
the charge, as I have never seen the MSS., and the first edition 
of my book containing the Argument of the Iliad was pub- 
lished the year before I went to England to pursue the work 
at the British Museum. 



181 



In Bacon's Argument we find : 

"Pcneleus, Leitus, Prothoenor, joyned with Arcesilaus and 
bold Clonius, equall in arms and in command, led Boeotia's 
hosts." 

This in his fuller poem appears : 

"Peneleus, Leitus, and Prothoenor, 
Join'd with Arcesilaus and hold Clonius — 
Two equal men in arms and in command — 
Led forth Boeotia's hosts." 
Pope's MS. at the British Museum reads : 

"The hardy warriors whom Boeotia bred 
Bold Clonius Leitus and Peneleus led." 
But these were afterward emended to suit his verse, and 
the printed lines are: 

"The hardy warriors whom Boeotia bred, 
Peneliiis, Leitus, Prothoenor led : 
With these Arcesilaus and Clonius stand 
Equal in arms and equal in command." 
By these comparisons we see that, in the printed poem, 
Clonius has lost his boldness and Peneleus has changed the 
spelling of his name. 

Again in the original MS. we find : 

"When first I led my troops to Phaea's wall 
And heard fair fardan's silver waters fall." 
But in Pope's printed poem it reads : 

"When fierce in war, where Jordan's waters fall,, 
I led my troops to Phea's trembling wall." 
In this place Bacon omits all mention of the Jardan, but in 
the catalogue of the ships he says, "Phsestus, by the silver Jar- 
dan." Chapman gives the name of the river, Jardanus, an- 
other translator speaks of the Jardan, but Mr. Marston, I 
notice, writes the word lardus. 

In his MS. Pope had "hilly Eteon" ; Bacon wrote "hillie 
Eteon" ; but Pope's printed work has "Eteon's hills." 

It is conceded that Pope followed Ogilby very closely. 
There may be some interesting developments in the history of 
the latter. We know that he was much employed about Gray's 
Inn, and that he was afterward taught Greek and Latin by the 
Oxford students to enable him to translate Homer and Virgil. 

182 



One thing needs no demonstration, that there was nothing in 
Bacon's Homer that made it necessary to keep it concealed 
before or after it was put in cipher. Upon that point he says 
that cipher writing became so much a habit, and pastime, that 
he embodied many things in it not necessarily secret. I 
quote: 

"And yet I have also emploied my cyphers for other then 
secret matters in many of my later bookes, because it hath 
now become so much an act of habite, I am at a losse at this 
present having less dificile labour, now, then in former times 
in Her Ma.'s service." — Bi-literal Cypher, p. 66. 

In the matter of criticism and expression of individual 
opinion, we might quote from Bacon's Essay of Custom and 
Education : "Men's thoughts are much according to their 
inclination ; their discourse and speeches according to their 
learning and infused opinions, but their deeds are after as they 
have been accustomed. 

Elizabeth Wei^i^s Gai.lup. 
Detroit, Mich., May 15, 1902. 



183 



REPLIES TO CRITICISMS. 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 

In presenting the results of my work in deciphering the bi- 
literal cypher, I expected criticism, but it has taken on some 
features that have been quite surprising to me. 

To answer fittingly all the questions raised would be to 
write a book. Some are relevant, many not ; some are prompted 
by desire for knowledge, others by a desire to check what they 
regard as a heresy; most show unfamiliarity with the subject, 
and not a few are mistaken in their statements of facts. 

REPLY TO MR. CANDLER. 

Mr. Candler, in the January number of the Nineteenth 
Century, republishes modified portions of an article that 
appeared in Baconiana to which I replied some time since, send- 
ing a copy of my article to him and to that magazine. 

Mr. Candler makes his objections under the heads : His- 
tory, Language, Arithmetical Puzzles, Geography, Proper 
Names, and Bacon's Poetry. 

HISTORY, 

As to History, I can only say, if the decipherings had been 
my own invention, I should have had them in substantial accord 
with such records as exist, defective as they now appear. Had 
I "followed" accepted history, and prevailing ideas, and 
found in the cipher confirmation of what people wish to have 
true, I should have received encomiums due to an important 
discovery, and commendation for great skill and industry in 
working it out. 

It was my misfortune that the cipher would not read that 
way, and no preconceived notions of my own could affect it. 
As I have elsewhere said "the facts of history" is an elastic 
term, and means to the individual that portion which the indi- 
vidual has learned. The records are by no means in accord, 
and discrepancies may well be left to the investigators, whose 

184 



revisions from data they may hereafter be able to collect may 
greatly change existing ideas. The decipherer is in no way 
responsible for the disclosures of the cipher, nor allowed specu- 
lation as to the probabilities in the case. One question only is 
admissible — what does the cipher tell ? 

, LANGUAGE. 

Under Language, Mr. Candler makes five subdivisions. 

1. "It was the English custom to use his in connection with 
inanimate objects where we now use its. This custom died out 
about 1670." 

This first objection is answered by himself, but in this con- 
nection he states : 

"Its (or earlier, it's) began to creep into literature about the 
end of the sixteenth century, though doubtless it was used col- 
loquially at an earlier date." 

As to his other deductions on this point, I cannot speak from 
knowledge, but whoever put out the First Folio was certainly 
not averse to the use of its. In my former paper in Baconiana 
I gave from the Shakespeare folio ten examples of the use of the 
word. As there is no punctuation in the cipher, I am unable to 
determine which form Bacon used, it's or its, but that he used 
the word frequently in some parts of the cipher and not at all 
in others, any reader may easily see. Thereof, of which Mr. 
Candler speaks, though more rarely found was occasionally 
used. — (See Bi-literal Cypher, p. 30, 1. 4; p. 61, 1. 24.) 

2. "From the date 1000 or earlier, we find many instances 
of his used instead of s in the possessive case, and similarly, for 
the sake of uniformity, of her and their. . . . But in 
Bacon, after a diligent collation of a great many pages, I find 
the general use of s without an apostrophe for the possessive 
case both for singular and plural, and no use of his, her, or their 
in this sense. When a noun ends with an s sound, Bacon joins 
the two words without a connecting s. Thus : 'Venus 
minion,' 'St. Ambrose learning,' and the curious form 'Achille's 
fortune,' which may be a printer's error, as the apostrophe here 
is in the wrong place. All these come from 1640 edition of the 
Advancement of Learning, Books i, 2." 

In a footnote Mr. Candler speaks of the seven instances sent 
him of the disputed form, but I wish to give them here. Henry 

185 



Seventh, (1622), "King Henry his quarrell," p. 24; the Con- 

spiratours their intentions," p. 124; "King Edward Sixt his 

time," p. 145; "King Henrie the Eight his resolution of a 

Divorce," p. 196; "King James his Death," p. 208. Also in 

Advancement of Learning (1605), Book i, "Socrates his 

ironicall doubting," p. 26; and one may see, "Didymus his 

Freedman." in the Tacitus. How many instances does he 

"^sh? 

.1 • ,, , •' 
Mr, Candler further says: "Antl how for the 'Bacon' of 

Mrs. Gallup. Turning casually over the leaves of her story I 
find 'Solomon, his temple,' p. 24; 'England, her inheritance,' 
p. 27; 'man, his right,' p. 23 and p. 24: 'my dear lord, his 
misdeeds,' p. 43; 'the roial soveraigne, uis eies,' p. 59; 'Cor- 
nelia, her example;' 'the sturdy yeomen, their support;' 'a 
mother, her hopes ;' 'woman, her spirit ;' and, curiously enough, 
where we might have expected an Elizabethan to have employed 
his 'Achilles' mind,' p. 302." 

Aside from the apostrophe, which could not of course be 
placed in cipher in the one case — suggested as a printer's error 
in the other — the forms "Achilles fortune" and "Achilles mind" 
are the same. We have the following examples and many 
others of the first form also in the Bi-literal Cypher, (omitting 
apostrophes,) "Elizabeths raigne," p. 4; "Kings daughter," 
ibid. ; "loves first blossom," "lifes girlod," p. 5 ; "stones 
throw," "Edwards sire," p. 6; "lions whelp," p. 7, etc., etc., etc., 
and we see that both forms are used in the published works and 
in cipher. 

3. Mr. Candler says : "It was the custom to finish the verb 
with s after plural nouns, as if it were the third person singular," 
but complains that I do not recognize this in the deciphered 
work. 

In two plays fifteen instances were found, seven of which are 
with the verb is or the abbreviation 's. In the Bi-literal Cypher, 
p. 177, 1. 9, Bacon speaks of "Illes which is laid by for the good 
opportunitie." There are undoubtedly other examples. 

4. "Mrs. Gallup's 'Bacon' is repeatedly quoting from his 
own published works and from the plays of Shakespeare." 

A reason is given for this, in the Bi-literal Cypher, p. 25. 
There are many examples also in Bacon's open works, e. g., 

186 



^'Females of Seditions" is found in Henry Seventh, p. 137, 
while in Essay, Seditions and Troubles, it appears in this form : 
"Seditious tumults and seditious fames differ no more but as 
brother and sister, masculine and feminine." 
From the Shakespeare plays we have, 



we see 



The waters swell before a boyst'rous storme." — Rich. HI. 

This occurs again as follows: "xA.nd as there are cer- 
tain hollow blasts of wind and secret swellings of seas before a 
tempest." — Ess. Seditions and Troubles. Also this : "Times 
answerable, like waters after a tempest, full of working and 
swelling." — Avdt. of L. (1605), Book 2, p. 13. 

A like recurrence is found in these : "And as in the Tides of 
People once up there want not commonly stirring winds to 
make them rough." — Henry Sez'enth, p. 164; "For as the aun- 
■ciente in politiques in popular Estates were woont to Compare 
the people to the sea, and the Orators to the winds because as 
the sea would of itself e be caulm and quiet, if the windes did 
not moove and trouble it,; so the people would be peaceable and 
tractable if the seditious orators did not set them in working 
and agitation." — Advt. of L. (1605), Book 2, 2nd p. yy. 

Many of the culled expressions in Bacon's Promus are 
employed in the cipher, as I have already found. When the 
same incidents are related in the word-cipher that are given in 
the biliteral, large passages must appear in both the Bi-literal 
Cypher and Bacon's open works. 

5. Mr. Candler makes a series of verbal distinctions, as 
follows : "There are, I think, words used in the cipher story 
in quite a wrong sense. I will give instances : 'Gems rare and 
costive.' Murray gives no example of costive meaning costly. 

'I am innocuous of any ill to Elizabeth.' Neither Murray 
nor Webster gives any example of 'innocuous of,' i. e., 'inno- 
cent of,' though innocuous may mean innocent. Shakespeare 
does not use the word. 

'Surcease' is a good enough word, but 'surcease of sorrow' 
is used by Poe, an American author ; and the use of the phrase 
by Mrs. Gallup's 'Bacon' makes one wonder whether he had 
ever read The Raven. 



187 



'Cognomen,' p. 29. No instance given in Murray earlier 
than 1809, 'Desiderata,' p. 161. No instance of 'desideratum'^ 
earlier than 1652. 

'Hand and glove,' p. 359. Earliest instance in Murray, 1680. 

'Cognizante' adj. Earliest example in Murray, 1820. Mur- 
ray says, 'Apparently of modern introduction; not in diction- 
aries of the eighteenth century ;' . . . (cognisance is quite 
early, both as a law term and in literary use.)" 

These are refinements beyond reason. Bacon added thou- 
sands of new words and new uses of words to the language. 
There is something applicable to the case in the Advancement of 
Learning ( 1605). 

"I desire it may bee conceived that I use the word in a differ- 
ing sense from that that is receyved,"and"I sometimes alter the 
uses and definitions." — Book 2, pp. 24-25. 

Had the word costive occurred but once I should have con- 
sidered it intended for costlye as we find it in Bacon. He may 
have used a v where y was intended. 

It is true innocuous, from the Latin innocuus, in the diction- 
aries is used only of things, but Bacon evidently employed it 
differently, and wrote "innocuous of ill" as he would have 
written "not guilty of crime." In Anatomy of Melancholy 
(1621) we find "Northerne men, innocuous, free from riot" 
(p. 82), and "The patient innocuous man." 

Surcease is used in the Shakespeare plays — Cor., Act 3 ; 
Rom. & Jul., Act 4; Macb., Act i. It is in Lucrece, and also 
occurs in Bacon's acknoweldged works. He had, perhaps, as 
good reason as Poe to desire 'surcease of sorrow.' 

Certainly, Bacon had a right to use words existing in any 
language. We know that he anglicized many from the Latin 
and the French. Cognomen is of course from the Latin ; desi- 
derata, Mr. Candler admits, was used in 1652; cognizante — or 
as it is elsewhere spelled in the cipher, cognisant — might be 
allowed him on the ground that cognisances was certainly in 
use. — Henry Seventh, p. 211 ; i Hen. VI., Act 2; Jul. Caisar, 
Act 2 ; Cym., Act 2. 

ARITHMETICAL PUZZLES. 

Mr. Candler is also inaccurate in his arithmetic. He has not 
carefully read pp. 66 and 67, where it is explained that Latin 
letters, called by us Roman, were used in a few dedications, 

188 



prologues, etc. I did not find these employed until the publica- 
tions of 1623 — in the folio and Vitse et Mortis. I have also 
shown elsewhere that, at the end of short sections that did not 
join with other works, there were occasionally a few letters 
more in the exterior passage than were required for the enfolded 
portion. These are nulls and not used. Mr. Candler gives 
the number of letters in the catalogue of the plays as 850 and 
says the portion extracted required 860. Both numbers are 
wrong. The cipher enfolded required 855 letters, and that is 
the exact number of letters in the catalogue when the Roman 
type is included and the diphthongs and digraphs are regarded 
as separate letters. 

GEOGRAPHY. 

Just what Mr. Candler would have us understand by refer- 
ring to the incorrect geography in the plays is not quite cleai. 
It has no relevance to the cipher nor does it determine whether 
Bacon or Shakespeare would suffer most from the criticism. 
The same may be said of the next paragraph under "Proper 
Names," for it was, and is, at least poetic license to change the 
pronunciation in that manner ; and as to the spelling of Iliad 
on page 176 of the Bi-literal, we have in Troilus and Cressida 
a parallel in, " as they passe toward Illium." Neither spelling 
nor pronunciation were well defined arts in Bacon's day or in 
Bacon's books. 

bacon's poetry. 

The quoted verse of this "concealed poet" speaks for itself, 
and on this point I may well be silent, except to say the partic- 
ular poetry Mr. Candler condemns is said to have been written 
on a sick bed at the age of sixty-two. 

It is amusing to see how many plans are made for Bacon by 
these critics, how many things are pointed out that he might, 
or should have done. Their long experience in surmising 
what Shakespeare may, can, must, might, could, would, or 
should have done in order to reconcile asserted facts has given 
them the habit of "guessing." 

Mr. Candler adds some footnotes, in one of which he quotes : 
" 'Mrs. Gallup, when challenged, failed to point out the cipher, 
an easy matter if it really existed ; and now avows that without 
extraordinary faculties and a kind of "inspiration," none, save 



herself, need expect to perceive it.' " And adds, "It should 
be understood that the President and Council of the Baconian 
Society enter a formal caveat that nothing- in Mrs. Gallup's 
interpretation can be said to have been satisfactorily proved." 

I remember very well the evening to which the extract from 
Baconiana refers, when, upon the invitation of a member of the 
legal profession, my sister and myself explained to two prom- 
inent Baconians the method and scope of our work. In theory, 
they accepted — or seemed to accept — what is unmistakably true, 
that for different sizes of type, — pica, small pica, English, etc. 
Bacon arranged different alphabets. It was shown that one 
size of ornamental capitals belonged to the 'a fount,' in another 
size the ornamental letters belonged to the 'h fount.' This was 
admitted as very possible, even probable,; yet when this was 
applied to practical demonstration of what Bacon did, they 
exclaimed: "Impossible!!" "Bacon never would have done 
that ! etc., etc." This could not be thought a receptive frame 
of mind, and just how they knew what Bacon would not have 
done I cannot tell. 

Afterward I showed them which letters belonged to the 'h 
fount,' in a number of lines of the Dedicatory Epistle of Spen- 
ser's Complaint s,m no single instance varying from the marking 
of the manuscript from which my book was printed. This was 
candidly admitted, yet, when this interview was reported, it 
read as above quoted. 

When I first put out the cipher, I thought any one who would 
take the time could decipher all that I have done, but when I 
found people who could not distinguish between this % and tt> 
to say nothing of obscure o's and ^'s, I despaired of their be- 
coming decipherers. There are, of course, many who have a 
correct eye for form, who will be able in time to overcome the 
difficulties this study presents, but I wish to ask Mr. Candler 
if he does not think the small a's, c's, etc., of the Latin illus- 
tration in De Augmentis Scientiariim, which he says a child 
could manage, quite as bewildering as any of the Italic letters 
elsewhere ? 

At the close of Mr. Candler's article he desires that I "get 
together a few men who know something about books, and add 
to them a printer or two, familiar with types, new and old; 

190 



between them if they extract a consecutive narrative 
there is nothing more to be said." I have extended this invita- 
tion many times, only to have it poHtely declined. The Editor 
of the Times refused, more than a year ago, to consider this 
request. Now, having practically lost the use of my eyes for 
such close work as this entails, I shall be obliged to forego, for 
a time at least, until a greater degree of strength has returned, 
the satisfaction it would be to point out in detail to a committee 
the various differences, though it seems to me they should be 
readily observable without my aid. In the meantime I rest in 
confidence that it will be correctly done by some one, somewhere 
and sometime. 



191 



REPLY TO MR. MARSTON. 

It seems rather infantile to call attention to the spelling, but 
as Mr. Marston deems it of sufficient importance to draw from 
it the following inference, he must think it serious. I quote 
from the Times of January 3 : "The whole thing is so trans- 
parently a concoction that a school boy who was reading this 
deciphered Tragedy asks: *Was Bacon a Yankee? He spells 
words like "labour" and "honour" without the "u".' " 

I would reply that he was the same person that wrote the 
Shakespeare plays. The folio shows both ways of spelling. 
But all the word-cipher productions were printed according to 
modern American usage, as in this Tragedy of Anne Boleyn. 

Mr, Marston emphasizes the matter by a second allusion to 
this peculiarity as discrediting my work, in the following 
words : "And Mrs. Gallup asks the world to believe Bacon 
wrote this 'new drama' in order to vindicate the 'honor' of his 
grandmother." 

A few minutes' examination shows, in the first four plays of 
Shakespeare, forty-four instances of the spelling of honor, with- 
out the u, against twenty-five occurrences of the word with the 
ti. For the spelling of labor, I will take time and space to quote 
only a single line from the first folio : 

"There be some Sports are painfull and their labor — " 
Tem. 3-1-1. 

These words occur in the cipher story, as in the plays, spelled 
both ways.* 

This suggests one thing of value to present day readers of 
the plays who do not know, or do not stop to consider, that 
modern editions differ greatly, and in important particulars, 
from the original editions, both spelling and grammar having 
been modified, while in some parts, whole paragraphs of the 
text are omitted to meet the ideas of what the particular editor 
thought the author shoidd have said. 

Mr. Marston, in theNineteenth Century, continues an argu- 
ment first put forth in the Times, and further illustrated in the 
Publishers' Circidar, attempting to prove that, because certain 
fragments of the Iliad, in the Bi-literal Cypher, deciphered from 

*Even present day London writers are not in accord in the use of "u," 
for I find in the Times, "font of type." Mr. Marston and others write 
"fount." . .Arc the writings of "A Correspondent" in the Times to be dis- 
credited for following the American method? 

192 



the Anatomy of Melancholy of 1628, are similar to Pope's ver- 
sion of tlie same passages, the whole long story comprising 
385 pages — about 300 of which relate to matters entirely 
foreign to the Iliad — must be a conscious fraud, and that "bold 
lie" is the key to the whole matter. It was hardly a courteous 
expression, and I have every confidence that Mr. Marston will, 
after more careful investigation, retract it. 

Any statement that I copied from Pope, or from any source 
whatever, the matter put forth as deciphered from Bacon's 
zvorks, is false in every particular. 

It will be noted that Mr. Marston makes no attempt to prove 
the cipher, but bases his convictions regarding the book upon 
this one point of similarity, in an insignificant portion of it, 
to Pope's translation of the Iliad. 

As it chanced, I had read Pope to some extent in the rhetori- 
cal studies of my school days, but had never re-read his Homer 
until Mr. Marston called attention to it. I now see a similarity 
in some expressions, and in the arrangement of names, in that 
portion devoted to the catalogue of the ships. Bacon's direc- 
tions for writing out the Iliad (by the word-cipher, p. 170), sug- 
gest that at that time he had not made as full preparation for 
writing out the catalogue as for the remainder of the work, 
and this seems significant. 

I do not find any striking resemblances in the other parts, 
and, as I stated in a recent communication to the Times, in 
an examination of six English translations and one Latin, I 
found that each might with equal justice be considered a para- 
phrase of Pope, or that he had copied his predecessors. Why, 
among several translations of the same Greek text, two having 
both resemblances and differences should be classed together, 
and one should necessarily be a copy of the other, is not clear to 
me. Knowing that Pope's was considered the least correct of 
several of the English translations, yet, perhaps, the best 
known for its poetic grace, it is hardly reasonable to suppose 
that I should have copied his, had I been dependent upon any 
translation for the deciphered matter. 

Bacon says his earliest work upon the Iliad was done under 
instructors. There were Latin translations extant in his day, 
which were equally accessible to Pope a century later. A simi- 



193 



larity might have arisen from a study by both of the same 
Latin text. George Chapman, in 1598, complained vigorously 
that some one had charged him with translating his Iliad from 
the Latin, and abusively replied. Theodore Alois Buckley, in 
his introduction to Pope's Iliad, says he was "not a Grecian" 
and that he doubtless formed his poem upon Ogilby's transla- 
tion, besides consulting friends who were better classical schol- 
ars than himself. 

But all this is of small importance, for it is inconclusive. The 
question is, did I find this argument of the Iliad in differing 
founts of Italic type in the text of the Anatomy of Melancholy f 

I have had set up by our printers from my MS. two sections 
of the Anatomy of Melancholy, from which were taken some 
passages Mr. Marston quotes. Modern Italic type has to be 
used, of course, and the two founts will be easily distinguish- 
able. They are so marked as unmistakably to indicate how the 
differing forms are used. A reference to an original copy of 
the Anatomy of Melancholy (1628), which may be seen in the 
British Museum, or in the fine library of Sir Edwin Durning- 
Lawrence, will quickly show whether or not I have used all 
the Italic letters in the text, whether they are of differing 
forms as marked in this, whether they have been properly 
grouped, and, when the bi-literal cipher is applied, whether they 
produce the results I have printed. If the types are of differing 
forms, are properly grouped, and produce, by the bi-literal 
method, the results printed, the question of identities or simili- 
tudes is eliminated from the discussion. 

I am aware that in offering this evidence in this way, I am 
at a serious disadvantage. The true classification of the 
types was determined after days of examination and compari- 
son of hundreds of the old letters, until every shade, and line, 
and curve of those I marked was familiar, and as thoroughly 
impressed upon my memory as the features of a friend, while 
to those making this comparison the letters themselves will be 
new, the number examined probably limited to those in a few 
sentences, and by eyes entirely unskilled in this kind of exam- 
ination. 

Mr. Marston refers to my use of an edition of the Anatomy 
of Melancholy, published after Bacon's death, as evidence that 

194 



I may be wrong. The edition I used was that of 1628, pub- 
lished by Dr. William Rawley. Concerning this and Rawley's 
work, I had found in deciphering Sylva Sylvarum, the follow- 
ing statement from Rawley himself: 

"When, however, you find this change .... where I beganne th' 
workc, you shall pause awhile, then use the alphabet as it is heerein 
employ'd and as explain'd in my preceding epistle. It will thus be like a 
new alphabet and doubtlesse will bee troublesome, yet can bee conn'd while 
some had to be discover'd ; but in respect of a probable familiaritie with 
th' worke, and the severall diverse methods employed oft by his lordship, 
this may by no meanes be requir'd, since th' wit that could penetrate such 
mysteries surely needeth no setti'g forth and enlarging of mine. 

Ere the whole question be dropt, however, let me bid you go on to my 
larger and fully arranged table where th' storie, or epistle, is finish'd as it 
should have beene had his lordship lived to compleat it, since my part was 
but that of th' hand, and I did write only that portion which was not us'd 
at th' time. All this was duely composed and written out by his hand, and 
may bee cherish'd. 

From his penne, too, works which now bear th' name Burton .... 
make useful those portions which could by noe means bee adapted to 
dramaticall writings. If you do not use them as you decypher th' interiour 
epistles, so conceal'd, your story shall not be compleat. 

Th' workes are in three divisio's, entitled Melancholy, its Anatomy. 
Additons to this booke have beene by direction of Lord Verullam, himselfe, 
often by his hand, whilst th' interiour letter, carried in a number of 
ingenious cyphers mentioned above, is from his pen, and is the same in 
every case that he would have used in these workes, for his is, in verie truth, 
worke cut short by th' sickel of Death." 

This edition of Burton was the only old book in hand at the 
time of its deciphering, and, having found the cipher in it, I 
continued work upon it, though its contents were a serious dis- 
appointment, and I have since greatly regretted the time and 
strength spent upon what was of so little value, and of no 
interest historically as relating to the personality of Bacon or 
the times in which he lived. Has it been noted by Mr. Marston, 
or by others who have been incredulous about this book, that 
Burton in the appendix to his will does not include the Anatomy 
of Melancholy in "such books as are written with mine own 
hands" ? While this might not be conclusive, it is, in the light 
of the cipher revelations, a very significant omission. I add here 
that the first edition was published in the name of T. Bright, 
under the title of A Treatise of Melancholy, in 1586, when 
Burton was ten years old and Bacon twenty-five. As the 
Anatomy of Melancholy, it was issued in Rawley's lifetime, 
in several editions under dates of 1621, 1624, 1628, 1632, 1638, 
165 1-2, 1660, 1676. The edition of 1676 was a reprint of 
an earlier edition and was issued after Rawley's death. Bur- 
ton died in 1640. 

195 



One of the passages which Mr. Marston quotes in proof of 
a paraphrase of Pope's translation is the expression, "HilHe 
Eteon, or the waterie plains of Hyrie." On referring to my 
MS. of the deciphering from Democritus to the Reader, p. 73, 
1. 24, Anat. of Mel., I find the phrase was extracted from the 
words, which are here set up in two founts of modern type. 

No one should pass judgment upon the Bi-literal Cypher who 
cannot, at sight, assign these letters to their respective founts, 
for it is much less difficult in these diagrams than in the old 
books themselves. 

FOUNTS USED 

(abab abab abab abab abab abab 

\AAaa BBhb CCcc DDdd EEee FFff 

jabab abab ababab abab abab abab 

\GG()g HHhh Iliijj KKlck LLll MMmm 

[abab abab abab abab abab abab 

{NNnn OOoo PPpp QQqq BRrr SSss 

jabab ababab abab abab abab abab 

}TTti VVvvuu WWww XXzx YYyy ZZzz 

Passage to be deciphered. 

xiitiis Crimine Nemo caret Keino sorte sua vivU conlentus Nemo in amove 
sapi/, Nemo bonuit, Nemo sajnens, Nemo, est ex omni parte beatus &-c. 
Nicholas Nemo, No body quid valeat Nemo, Nemo referre potest vir sapit 
qui pauca loquitur 

Grouping in fives as the words stand, we have: 
V i t ij s Crim ine Ne mo car ei Nem osort esua v tvitc 

a a fi a a b b b a b a a a a b a b a a b ab a a b a aa a a b a a a a b a a b a 
E B K K A R T 

onien tusNe 

abanabaaab 

I s 

The first group forms the biliteral letter e, but the next has 

two 'b fount' letters at the commencement. There is no letter 
in the biliteral alphabet commencing hb, but there is a pos- 
sibility of a printer's error, and it is necessary to examine the 
following groups. Each forms a bi-literal letter, but they are a 
jumble and cannot be set off, or divided into words. 

Another attempt is necessary to pick up the cipher thread. 
Omitting one letter at the beginning, the grouping is : 
itijs Crimi neNem ocare tNemo sorte sioavt vitco 

a i a a 6 b b a b a a a a b a b a a b a b a a b a a a a a b a. a a a l> a a b a a 
K C T T B B E 

11 tent n s Ne m 

b II a a b a a a b b 
S D 

196 



Here, again, bb comes at the beginning of a group, but going 
on with the remainder of the line the resulting letters are again 
impossible to separate into any intelligible words. 

Omitting another letter we have: 
t ij s C rimin eNemo caret N <in o s ortes uaviv itcon 

b ,1 a h b b a b a a a a b a b a a b a b a a b a a a a a b a a a a b a a b a n b 
UWFFECCK 

t e n tu s Ne mo in a mo reswp i t Nem 

a a a b a a a b b a b a b b a a a b b a b b a a a 

C Q Y a 

Another trial commences with the fourth letter, and the 
groups are : 

ijsCr iinine Nemioc aretN emoso rteau avivi tcont 

a a b b b a b a a ti a, b a b a a b a b a a b a a a a a b a a a a b a a b a a b a, 
HI L L I E E T 

ant US Nenioi nam or esapi tNenio bonus Nemos apien 

a a b a a a b b a b a b b a a, a b b a b b a a a a b a a b a a a b b b a a b u a 
EONO RT HE 

sNemo estex omnip art eh eatus &cNic ho I as NemoN 

b a b a a a a a a a b a a b a a a b a » b a a a a a b a a a a a b a a a b b in 
W A T E R I E P 

obody quidv aleat NemoN emore ferre potes tvi'rs 

a b a b a a a a a a a b a a a a b b a a b a a a b a b b a b a a b a b a a b b b 
LAI N S O F H 

apitq uipau caloq uiticr 

b a b b a b a a a a ab a a a a a b a a 
Y R I E 

DECIPHERED PASSAGE 

None of these groups begins with two fe's, and the resulting 
letters spell out the line quoted. 

hillieeteonorthewaterieplainsofhyrie 

Hillie Eteon or the waterie plains of Hyrie. 

The capitalization and punctuation are suggested by the 
rules of literary construction. There are four possible wrong 
groupings, but this illustration required only the trial of three 
to find the correct one. Should there be obscure, or doubtful, 
letters in the text that make the resulting letters of a group 
uncertain, pass the whole group by until those are marked which 
are certain. There are always a sufficient number of 6's to indi- 
cate what the word really is in the groups preceding and follow- 
ing. In the resulting phrase above, a number of the letters might 
be passed over as abbreviations and yet the sense could hardly 
be mistaken even in this short and disconnected line, while with 
the context it would be made perfectly clear. 

197 



Mr. Marston quotes another passage as evidence that I have 
"copied Pope" : 

"Hee was th' first of th' Greekes who boldHe sprang to th' 
shore when Troy was reach'd, and fell beneath a Phrygian 
lance." 

Referring to my MS., I find this comes from page 38, Anat. 
of Mel., commencing in line 11. I have had this printed, also, 
and grouped for the resulting bi-literal letters that form the 
deciphered passage, and I think it well to use this because it 
illustrates one of the points that should be clearlv understood. 

Anatomy of Melancholy, p. 38, 1. 11 ; Edition 1628 ). 

Claudinus Hippocrates Paracelsus Noii est reludandwu cum Deo Her- 
cules Otympicks, lupiter Jupiter Hercules Nil iuvat innnensos Cratero 
'promittere montes we ntjist submit ourselues vnder the ■mujhty hand of God 
vna eadeinq manus vulnus openiq feret Achilles A Digression of the valine 
of Spirits, bad Angels or Divels, and how they cause Melanclu Iv. 
Postellus, full of controversie and ambiguity fateor exced£re vires intentionis 
meae Austin yinitum de infinito non potest statuere Acts Sadducees Galen 
Peripateticks Aristotle Pomponatius Scaliger Dandinus com in lib de 

and in us Hip pocra tesPa race I susNo neslr el net 

a a b b b a a b a a a a b a a b a b a a a a a a a b a a a b b a a b a a a b b b 

andunt cumDe oHerc ulesO li/nipi ckslu piter lupit 

a a b a b a b a a a b a u ti u b a a u b b a a 6 a a b b a b a a b a b b a a b ii 

crHer cules Niliu vatim men so sCrat eropr omitt 

a a b b b a a b b a b a a a a a a b a a a a b a a a b a a b a a b a a b a a a b 

eremo ntesw eniust sub mi tours elues vnder them % 

b a b a a a a b b b a b b a b a a a a b a b b a b a b a b a a a a b b a b a a a 

g h tyh and of G odvn ae ad e in qman us v lil nusop e m qfe 

a b a a a a a b a a b a a a b a b b b a b a a a a a a a a a a b b a a a a b b a 

retAc hille sADig ressi onoft henat ureof Spiri 

b a a b a a b b a b b a a b a a a b b b b a a a b a a b b b a b b a b b a a a a 

tsbad Angel sorDi velsa ndhow theyc auseM elanc 

aa b a a b a b a a aa b b b a a b a a a b b a a b a a b a b a a a a a b b a b 

holy P o stel liosfu llofc ontro versi ean da mbigu 

i a b b a b a ba a a a a a a b a a a b b a a a a a a b a a a a a a a a a a b a 

xXyfa teore xcede r,evir esint en tic nisme aeAus 

aa b b b a a a b b a a a a a a b b a a a a a b b a a b a b a a b a a a b a b a 

tin/i nitutn deinf inito nonpo tests tatue re Act 

a b a b a a a a a b a a b a a a b b a a a a b a a a a a a a b a a b a a a b b b 

sSadd xicees Oalen Perip ateti cksAr istot lePom 

a a a a a a b b b a a a b b b b a a a a b a b b a a b b a a a b a a a a a a a a 

p onat iusSc a li g e r D and inusc ominl 

a b b a a a b a b a a a a a a a b b a a a a a b a a a b a a 
DECIPHERED PASSAGE 

Hee was th' first of th' Greekes who boldlie sprang to th' shore 
when Troy was reach'd, and fell beneath a Phrygian lance. 

198 



In the word Phrygian, the fifth group which should make 
the letter g, aabba, really is n, abbaa, probably Rawley's mis- 
take, for the printer should not answer to every charge. The 
two b's stand together, as they should, but are one point re- 
moved to the left. 

Every page of the book was worked out in the manner illus- 
trated, every Italic letter classified and the result set down, nor 
could any "imagination or predetermination" change the re- 
sult. 

In this connection as few of your readers have opportunity to 
examine the old books I will reproduce the CicerO' Epistle con- 
taining the Spartan dispatch from each of the 1623 and 1624 
editions of De Augmentis, showing the differences and the 
errors in the second which like those occurring in the text of 
the old books have to be corrected if the work goes on. 



199 



De Augmentis Scientiarmn. London Edition, 162^. 

Plate i. 



LiBtR Stxrvs. 



Exemplum ay^lphaheti ^iliteranj.. 



^ 



c, 



c? 



^ 



Jjdaan aanap aanrs a.zaU iinrji aclab 

g ffc g 0^ -c ^i 

aciubti . acopp ' auaaa avcLoJ) abaha. ■afaf^ 

gi <S 0, ^ S 
^ V w 0Q> y ^^ 

(a^fii. Diidfb. haccui • DohaS. Sahpci . bahbi- 

Ncquc leuc quidciam obucc hoc modo. pcrfcifkuna 
eft. Eccnirncxhoc ipfopacct Modus, quo ad omncm 
Loci Dillanciam, per Obicda, quz vd Vifui vd Audi - 
tuifubiicipofnnc, Scnfa Animi profcrrc, &: flgnificarc 
liccac, rimodoObicclailla, duplicis taiuum Diffcrcn- 
nx capacia funt , vduti per Campaiiat^ per Buccinas, 
per Flainmcos^pcr SoriitusTormcnroriim, (^: alia qu.c- 
cunqiic Vcrumvt Incospcum pcj-fcq^uamur, cum ad 
ScnbciiJum accingcns, EpiAobm Intcnorcm in Alpha- 
bcium hoc Bditerarium folues. Sit Epiftola interior ; 

Exemplum Solutionis, 

^ V. g. ^. 

Uid^af, fiiaff. dCLvbd. napaa 

Prxilo 



'9 



200 



Plate ii. 
280 2)<? Augment is, Scientiarum-> 



VixWo fimul fit aliud Alphahetum Biforme, lUiiiirum , 
c^iiodCmga\2is Alphabeti Communit Litcras, tam Capita- 
lcs,cjuammjnorcs, duplici Forma, prout cuiquc com- 
modum fit, cxhiHeac. 

Exemplum ^Iphabeti 'BiformU. 

a. l.xi.b, a. b ,a,.l, A. h. a,. p. a., ia.b. 
a. p. (LP. a, p. a, /. cu p. a. b. a. b. a. pI 




<l. P. C^'t,c.b'(uh,a..P.cL.p.a..b. a..b, O/. 



201 



Plate iii. 

JLlBER SeXTVS. 

TumdemumEpiftoIi;Intcnori,iam hcXr Brltrcrau^ 
Epidolam E^itx\oxt\w Biformem^ lircratlm acc'onuno- 
dabis, & poftca dcfcribes. Sit Ep.ltola Exrcnor; 
Manere tc <-volo donee 'vencro. 

Exemplum ^ccommodatioim, 

<f V § ^ 

a ai (1D.£ • ad b £ dd a la aa fa a. 
Jpjjiitcn tc -vHo diynico tcruf^ 

Appofuimus ctiam Exemplum aliud largius ciufdem 
Ciphix,Scril>endiOmma per Omnia. 

Epiftola Interior, ad quam aelegi- 

m\xs Epiftolion Spartanam^ miflatn 

ohm in Scyralc. 

xercfitac J\€^> Jnindarm ceciait Jmfiks ^ 
cjurtunt zficam nine tws txtricaremjuc 
nic cuuhiu manere Jo j^umm . 



281 



Epiftola Exterior, fumpta ex Bpijlola 
Prima Cicaontf^ in qu^ Epiftola Spar- 
tana inuotuicur. 

Oo 



202 



Plate iv. 



z)^^(^ OTTiTii ojjioio, dcpotitutieMzema.tc;' 
ca^ttcrif ja,tuputo anrnmu -. JMikv ivn mm;: 
anamsdhsmcio • J^rttn- tstemmmaaniz 
tudo tuoram crodmc mcr^rum^vi-audni^ 
(vm fii\ nislfajictd rt, at mt nan omatucsz 
ft; ego, dnin rum idem m hwy cans a ifjicio^ 
tntam rriifu csst (UcmtftipOtnt . fmccuiz 

^cr afsdtmcttaihref^^tr avuK^ cmt^imadc^ 
jut tclmtjnti)aucistmt(mtmsa^dzB^ 

Qiimis- cdum-nUm^ non TtluLumt^ sednuu 



202 



De Augmentis Scientiarum. Paris Bdition, 1624. 

366 De^ugmem'is Sciemiarum* 

tumtnodfi Litcras fojuantur ,/ per Tranfpofitioncna 
.carum. Nam Tranfpofitio duarum Licerarum , per 
Locprquinquc, Differentiis.triginca duabus, multd 
nragis viginti quatuor ( qui dft Numerus Jlpha- 
^mapud nos ) lufiiciet. Huius Alfhaim Excmplunx 
tale eft. 

Exemplum K^l^hahetiMitenr^. 

m 

S ^ (T ^ <> ^ 

^£ O ^ (h ^ S 
Mpaa.awap .upppk, MPPfpSaaaaJaaaS- 

"^ V V) 00 y ^ 

SaapA.pa<m^SaSaa 'PaSaSJaf^aJaSSf 

Neque leuc qui3dam obiter hocmodo perfedum 
cft^Etenim ex hoc ipfo patet Modus , quo ad oitincni 
Loci Difl:antiam,per Obic(3:a>qu2E vcl Vifui,vcl Audi- 
tui fubijci poflint,Scnfa Animi proferre, &: fignificarc 
liceat : fi modo Obicda illa,duplicis cantum DifFcren- 
ti^capaciafiint, vclutiperCampanas , per Buccinas^ 
per Flammeos,pei' SonitusTormentorum,& alia qu^^ 
cunque. VerumvtIacoeptumpcrfequamur,cum ad 
Scribendum accingoris , Epiftolam interiorem m^lr 
^hidfemmhoc^iliteramm folues. Sit cpiftolaintcriori 



204 



LihetSextfif'. 307 

ExeiTipIunl Solutionis. 

Ji^dtd^ pcLCLDU'^ CLdLuPd* ddhaa^ 

Pr«ft6 {\x^yA{\x.2Sx\xiiA^ha.httuYn Biforme, nimirutru 
quod fingulas jdlphaheti Communis Literas , tarn Capi- 
talcs,quacm minor es^duplici Forma , prout cuiqj com^ 
niodam,fit cxhibear. 

Exemplum Alj^haleti BifirmiSo 

JlicLn€r% ie ^crlo cCantc ven^Vff 

Turn demum Epiftolx Interiorly iam faftae BiUterat§, 
Epiftolam Extcriorcm Biforntemy literatim accommo^ 
dabis,& pofteadefcribes. Sit Epiftola Extcriorj 
Adanefe te 'volo donec^enero* 
Exemplum AccommoddLtionis. 

all ad. apPdP . MpaMpp.POMdi.PiUl^b 

Appofuimus ctiam Exemplum aliud largius eiuf- 
dem Ciphrac , Scrihendi Omnia per Omnia, 
Epiftola Interior , ad quam dolegimus EpifloUm ' 
Spananam y miflam olimin Scyralc. 
VerdiU "R^s. Q^indarfis cecidit t:^tl'ttes efi- 
riunt, !J^^qut hincnos ex tricar e^ neque 
hicdmum mmcre^ojjumtis. 

Q^ ii 



205 



308 De L^tipnemls SctemUrum, 

a- P'C^.p* ^« p * a.p* Or. p. a-p a. A^./* 
a^ PdJ^O'* p* d^pctp* a^p^ a^ p.a.p. 

a. b <l.PM^p.<lP,<i.p^a.k(^.p^ CPM. 

XMn.%.0. e.ccr^^j^. Q^Ji-^ 

p d^P'Ci^p.^p.d^ p^di^^p^d. p^H'P.ap 
"^^.^.w.w. SC.9e.oc.se Wj^.2 

£piftoIa£xterior ^ fumpta ex Epiftola PnW Cfccromfy 
in <}ua EfifioU Sfartana inuoluicur. 



206 



Q^fffo- ffmx mioioy dcjoiiusyiddit emi^; 
ctLiUri: ^aii^cio omnium: JMthiifiinw^ 
duint s Ait's facto- 'Sa.nfa tst enimmajiii= 
fttdo ivumiWr croA mc mBrihMinv,ytyumu 
am h., nisipsmcilre, cUmcnon amjU-tcs^ 






4C; c^oauunotviiUftiinim cMs<iyfkm 

tkanumHn esst accmttnpiHm .zkcdU- 

Jf^katz mnt' Jlmmmim J\ms W4^<f 

iim rem d^tti ^mnf. Senahs ^/t= 

^tmf- cammniain non ii^lment^ si£naz 

kuoUniui ziillms Z^'^uu-^Bfionu 

Ctg iij 



207 



In the 1624 edition the second \i in officio is changed by the 
lawof tied letters ; the second m in nunqiiam has positioner angle 
of inclination, to make it an 'a fount' letter ; q in conquiesti is 
from the wrong fount, and the u has features of both founts but 
is clear in one distinctive difference — the width at the top ; the 
q in quia is reversed by a mark; the a's in the first causa are 
formed like 'b fount' letters but are taller, ; the q of quos is from 
.ae wrong fount ; the second a in aderas is reversed being a tied 
letter; / in velint is from the wrong fount, also the p of parati, 
che / of calumniam and the /of religione. 

In line twelve 'pauci sunt' in 1623 ed. is 'parati sunt' in the 
1624 ed. The correct grouping is ntqui velin tquip rat is untom 
nesad, the first a in 'parati' must be omitted to read diutius 
according to the Spartan dispatch. Otherwise the groups 
would be arati sunto mnesa. The m and n are both 'b fount.' 
thus bringing two b's at the beginning of this last group, indi- 
cating at once a mistake for no letter in the bi-literal alphabet 
begins with two b's and wherever encountered may be known to 
indicate either a wrong fount letter or a wrong grouping. It is 
one of the guards against error. To continue the groups after 
the one last given several would be found to commence with bb, 
and the resulting letters would not "read." 

Here, too, is an example of diphthongs, digraphs, and double 
letters, which are troublesome to "A Correspondent." The 
diphthong ae of "cseteris," the digraph ct in perfectare, and the 
double ^'s and pp's are shown as separate letters and must be 
treated as such in deciphering Italics. 

A very important feature, that most seem to forget, is that 
ciphers are made to hide things, not to make them plain or 
easy to decipher. They are constructed to be misleading, mys- 
terious, and purposely made difficult except to those possessing 
the key. Seekers after knowledge through them must not 
abandon the hunt, upon encountering the first difficulty, im- 
probability, inaccuracy, or stumbling block set for their confu- 
sion. 

Were the confirmation of this cipher of importance to the 
government — a matter of life or death to an official, or likely 
to concern the strategic movement of an army — the energies of 
many minds would be centered upon deciphering it. But it 

208 



would appear from the writing's we have recently seen, the 
greatest effort is to prevent its development or acceptance — 
that the ideas of a lifetime be not overturned, and the satisfac- 
tion remain that the individual has already compassed the limits 
of information. It is so much pleasanter to be satisfied 
with what we have than to delve for things we do not want to 
know. 

Personally, it is a matter of no vital importance to me 
whether the cipher is accepted or not. I have put my best efforts 
into its discovery and elucidation. I know that I have accomp- 
lished what others have failed to do, and I can look on with 
equanimity as the world wrestles with the evidences, and finally 
comes, as it will, to the conclusion I have reached. 

The impetus given the movement by this discussion will 
result in important research, and other discoveries concerning 
Bacon that I am unable to make, will, with the light that has 
now been thrown upon the subject, confirm what has been set 
forth and much more besides. As I write, an article in 
Baconiana makes a suggestion which should be acted upon at 
once: 

"Our attention has also been called to a sealed bag of papers 
at the Record office. It was, it is said, sealed at the death of 
Queen Elizabeth, and to be opened only by joint consent of the 
reigning Sovereign, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Lord 
Chancellor. Is not the time come when we may fitly memorial- 
ize His Majesty, King Edward, to command or sanction the 
opening and revelation ?" 



209 



REPLY TO SIR HENRY IRVING. 

THE PRINCETON ADDRESS. 

Ill an address at Princeton on the Shakespeare-Bacon con- 
troversy, Sir Henry Irving did me the honor of mention, 
although in rather a disparaging way, as "constructing a won- 
derful cipher out of the higgledy-piggledy lettering" of the 
First Folio and other Elizabethan books in which irregular 
lettering is found. 

As comparatively few will recognize from the terms Sir 
Henry used, the actual meaning of this characterization of the 
peculiar printing, I beg leave to say that he refers to the two 
or more forms of Italic letters the printers of that day employed 
in the same text of many books, and that I have discovered 
that their use in a large number was for the purpose of em- 
bodying the biliteral cipher invented by Bacon. Much of this 
work has been deciphered and published as the Bi-literal 
Cypher of Francis Bacon, and no doubt the recent discussion 
of this book in England, — and the echoes, on this side, of the 
controversy, — was the suggestion, at least, of the theme of the 
Princeton address. 

Sir Henry points out that by "this wondrous cipher Bacon 
is alleged to have written in addition to Shakespeare and 
Greene, the works of Ben Jonson and Marlowe, Spenser's 
Faerie Queene and Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy," but 
says "its chief business is to stagger us with the revelation 
that Bacon was the 'legitimate son of Queen Elizabeth.' " 

It is not my purpose at this time to discourse upon the dis- 
coveries I have made, which, among a great deal else equally 
important, most certainly reveal all that Sir Henry mentions — 
except that Bacon lays no claim to the greater part of Ben 
Jonson's works — but I wish to throw additional light upon cer- 
tain passages in the address that are presented as facts irrec- 
oncilable with the cipher disclosures. These "facts" are sup- 
posed to show that it is not in the realm of possibility that 
Bacon could have written the plays. 

210 



In the opening sentences, Sir Henry refers to some words 
of his own used as a fitting conclusion to a treatise on the 
Bacon-Shakespeare Question by Judge Allen of Boston. I 
quote : "When the Baconians can show that Ben Jonson was 
either a fool or a knave, or that the whole world of players and 
playwrights at that time was in a conspiracy to palm off on 
the ages the most astounding cheat in history, they will be 
worthy of serious attention." 

If Sir Henry Irving to-day appeared in a new play, 
and at the same time claimed that it was the work of his hand, 
it would not, probably, require "a conspiracy of the whole 
world of players and playwrights to palm it off" on the present 
age to say nothing of the future. 

The writers who refer so confidently to Ben Jonson's praise 
of Shakespeare, do not observe that he says : 

"he seemes to shake a Lance, 

As brandisht at the eyes of Ignorance." 

They are blind, also, to the significance of the lines : 

"From thence to Honour thee, I would not seeke 
For names ; but call forth thund'ring ^schilus, 

Euripides, and Sophocles to us, 
Paccuvius, Accius, him of Cordova dead. 

To life againe, to heare thy Buskin tread, 
And shake a Stage : Or, when thy Sockes were on, 

Leave thee alone for the comparison 
Of all, that insolent Greece, or haughtie Rome 

Sent forth, or since did from their ashes come. 

The 'buskin' signified tragedy, 'socks' comedy, and it was 
as an actor, not as an author, that Jonson would compare 
Shakespeare with both ancient and modern Greece and Rome. 
His name was in the list of actors of some of Jonson's plays, 
as well as of "Shakespeare's." Beeston says, "he did act exceed- 
ingly well," and we are indebted to Mr. Sidney Lee's Shake- 
speare in Oral Tradition for a revival of "the exciting discov- 
ery some actors made" of Shakespeare's brother Gilbert whose 
memory "only enabled him to recall his brother's performance 
of Adam in his( ?) comedy of As you like it." 

It is true that Shakespeare was lauded for the literary work 
supposed to be his, yet in the article just cited we observe also 
that "Shakespeare's extraordinary rapidity of composition was 
an especially frequent topic of contemporary debate." There 
were men even then who realized that these things were not 
possible to their Shakespeare. 



211 



In the Advancement of Learning we read ; "He is the 
greater and deeper pollitique, that can make other men the 
Instruments of his will and endes, and yet never acquaint them 
with his purpose : So that they shall doe it, and yet not know 
what they doe, then hee that imparteth his meaning to those 
he employeth." B. 2., ist p. 33. 

This would suggest that Bacon did not impart his pur- 
poses to his "masques." Ignorant of the fact that Shake- 
speare's name was being employed as was his own, Greene 
exclaimed, "An upstart crow beautified with our feathers!" 
The similarity of expression was apparent to him, as to stu- 
dents of the present day, and the charge of plagiarism was 
very natural. 

Sir Henry points out that although Bacon "was the legiti- 
mate son of Queen Elizabeth, his unnatural mother showed not 
the smallest desire to advance his interests." But what shall 
be said of Sir Nicholas Bacon's failure to make provision for 
Francis ? The cipher history makes that point quite clear. He 
made provision for his own sons, and in a certain sense Eliza- 
beth provided for hers, although she did not give them public 
recognition nor show the elder any marked favor. 

Sir Henry asks : "What did Bacon know about the stage?" 
What did he not know about the stage? A few random quo- 
tations will best answer these questions : 

"In the plays of this philosophical theatre you may observe 
the same thing which is found in the theatre of the poets, that 
stories invented for the stage are more compact and elegant, 
and more as one would wish them to be, than true stories out 
of history." Nov. Or., p. 90. 

"Representative [poetry] is as a visible history, and is an 
image of actions as if they were present, as history is of actions 
in nature as they are (that is) past." Adv. of L., p. 204. 

"In whose time also began that great alteration in the state 
ecclesiastical, an action which seldom cometh upon the stage." 
Adv. of L., p. 193. 

"As if he were conscient to himself that he had played his 
part well upon the stage." Adv. of L., p. 362. 

"But it is not good to stay too long in the theatre." Adv. 
of L., p. 206. 

212 



"But men must know, that in this theatre of man's life it is 
reserved only for God and the angels to be lookers on." De 
Aug., p. 198. 

"As it is used in some Comedies of Errors, wherein the mis- 
tress and the maid change habits. Adv. of L., p. 315, De 
Aug., p. 199. 

"What more unseemly than to be always playing a part?" 
Adv. of L., p. 349. . 

"And then what is more uncomely than to bring the man- 
ners of the stage into the business of life?" De Aug., p. 235. 

"Besides it is unseemly for judicial proceedings to borrow 
anything from iJie stage." De Aug., p. 340. 

"But the best provision and material for this treatise is to 
be gained from the wiser sort of historians, not only from the 
commemorations which they commonly add on recording the 
deaths of illustrious persons, but much more from the entire 
body of history as often as such a person enters upon the stage; 
for a character so worked into the narrative gives a better idea 
of the man, than any formal criticism and review can." Dc 
Aug., p. 217. 

"This was one of the longest plays of that kind that hath 
been in memory." History of Henry the Seventh, p. 304. 

"Therefore now like the end of a ploy, a great number came 
upon the stage at once." History of Henry the Seventh, p. 287. 

"But from his first appearance upon the stage." H. VH., 

"He had contrived with himself a vast and tragical plot." 
H. VH., p. 302. 

"As to the stage, love is ever matter of comedies and now 
and then of tragedies." Essays, p. 95. 

The stage and stage plays were constantly in Bacon's mind. 
The point is not well taken that Bacon could not have written 
tlic plays from lack of familiarity with the stage, from lack of 
the old plays that were the basis of some, from the impossibility 
of altering the plays extant, or of collaborating with other 
writers in the historical dramas. Bacon had access to all sorts 
and conditions of men, to all varieties of literature, but the 
proofs of collaboration are entirely wanting. 

Again, Sir Henry states: "His [Shakespeare's] knowl- 
edge of law was supposed to be wonderful by Lord Campbell 
but does not commend itself to Judge Allen." 

213 



This is the opinion of one man opposed to that of another, 
Warner, in speaking of the chorus in Act i., Sc. ii., H. V., says: 
"It reads like the result of a lawyer's struggle to embalm his 
brief in blank verse." 

A little further on in Sir Henry's speech we find an allusion 
to 'Shakespeare's careless notions about law, geography, and 
historical accuracy.' 

When the great German Schlegel wrote, "I undertake to 
prove that Shakespeare'^ anachronisms are for the most part 
committed purposely and after great consideration," the truism 
was more far-reaching than he knew. The double purpose that 
many lines and often whole passages serve, was the real cause 
of the anachronisms, and want of historical accuracy. In 
Richard the Second the pathetic scene of the queen's interview 
with the dethroned Richard as he is being led to the Tower, 
is "both historically inaccurate and psychologically impossible. 
The king and queen did not meet again at all after their parting 
when Richard set out for Ireland, and Queen Isabel was a 
child." — Warner's Hist. Nearly the entire scene is a part of 
the hidden cipher drama. The White Rose of Britain, and is the 
parting of the pretended Richard, Duke of York, — Warbeck, 
named by the Duchess of Burgundy the White Rose, — from his 
faithful wife, Katharine, to whom the title was afterward 
given. 

"Qn. This way the King will come : this is the way 

To Julius Caesar's ill-erected Tower: 

To whose flint bosome, my condemned Lord 

Is doom'd a Prisoner, by prowd 

Here let us rest, if this rebellious earth 

Have any resting for her true King's Queene. 

ENTER RICHARD AND GUARD. 

But soft, but see, or rather do not see 

My fair Rose wither : yet look up ; behold. 

That you in pittie may dissolve to dew. 

And wash him fresh again in true-love Teares. 

Ah thou, the Modell where old Troy did stand. 

Thou Mappe of Honor, thou King Richard's Tombe, 

And not King Richard : thou most beauteous Inne, 

Why should hard-favor'd Griefe be lodged in thee. 

When Triumph is become an ale-house guest? 

Rich. Joyne not with griefe faire Woman, do not so, 
To make my end too sudden : learne good Soule, 
To thinke our former State a happie Dreame, 
From which awak'd, the truth of what we are, 
Shewes us but this. I am sworne Brother (Sweet) 
To grim Necessitie ; and hee and I 

Will keepe a League till Death," etc. — R. II., Act. v., Sc. i. 
214 



Again in Henry the Sixth, see all the conversation regard- 
ing the marriage of Edward the Fourth: A note on the 
play says "nothing is historically certain concerning the episode 
except that Edward married the Lady Elizabeth Grey." It is a 
part of another cipher drama, the Tragedy of Anne Boleyn, 
where some were bold enough to challenge the right of the mar- 
riage of Henry the Eighth with the beautiful Anne Boleyn : 

"Lady. My lords, before it pleas'd his Majestic 
To rayse my State to Title of a Queene, 
Doe me but right, and you must all confesse, 
That I was not ignoble of Descent, 
And meaner than mysclfe have had like fortune. 
But as this Title honors me and mine, 
So your dislikes, to whom I would be pleasing, 
Doth cloud my joyes with danger, and with sorrow. 

King. My Love, forbeare to fawne upon their frownes : 
What danger, or what sorrow can befall thee, 

So long as is thy constant friend, 

And their true Soveraigne, whom they must obey? 
Nay, whom they shall obey, and love thee too, 
Unlesse they seeke for hatred at my hands: 
Which if they doe, yet will I keep thee safe. 
And they shall feele the vengeance of my wrath.' 

H. VI., Act iv., Sc. i. 

Critics trace the marked anti-papal spirit of King John to 

'Henry the Eighth's revolt from the Roman obedience,' and 

these passages are indeed a part of Henry's speech, in the 

Tragedy of Anne Boleyn: 

"What earthie name to Interrogatories 

Can tast the free breath of a sacred King? 
But as we, under heaven are supreame head, 
So under him that great supremacy 
Where we doe reigne, we will alone uphold 
Without th' assistance of a mortall hand : 
For he that holds his Kingdome, holds the law." 

And again : 

"Yet I alone, alone doe me oppose 

Against the Pope, and count his friends my foes." 

K. J., Act iii., Sc. i. 

The following lines are a part of the cipher poem, the 

Spanish Armada: 

"So by a roaring Tempest on the flood, 

A whole Armado of convicted saile 

Is scattered and dis-joyn'd from fellowship." 

K. J., Act iii., Sc. iii. 

A part of Cranmer's prophetic speech at Elizabeth's chris- 
tening has reference to Francis himself: 

215 



"So shall she leave her Blessednesse to One 

(When Heaven shall call her from this clowd of darknes) 

Who, from the sacred Ashes of her Honour 

Shall Star-like rise, as great in fame as she was. 

And so stand fix'd."— H. l^III., Act v., Sc. iv. 

The mention of quoting Marlowe sometimes with acknowl- 
edgment — sometimes omitting the acknowledgment — shows 
that Sir Henry does not concede that the plays of Marlowe 
were from the same pen as the plays of Shakespeare, but he 
admits that 'Marlowe was Shakespeare's model in several 
ways,' and in making this admission he reveals a recognition of 
similarity that he can in no way account for until he accepts the 
very natural 'cause of this effect' made known in the cipher. 

Next we find : "Shakespeare had an immeasurable recep- 
tivity of all that concerned human character." 

This is, of course, an inference drawn from the plays. It is 
well known to all close students of that marvelous literature 
that its author discerned every type of human character, un- 
derstood the influence of environment upon men and women, 
and had a wide and deep knowledge of the spirit of the times, 
in different ages and in many countries. We do not differ in 
opinion there, but Sir Henry speaks of the author by his 
pseudonym, I by the name his foster father gave him. 

Tennyson is quoted to show Bacon's opinion of love : "The 
philosopher who in his essay on Xove' described it as a 'weak 
passion' fit only for stage comedies, and deplored and despised 
its influence over the world's noted men, could never have writ- 
ten 'Romeo and Juliet'." 

In the Advancement of Learning, Bacon says : "Love 
teacheth a man to carry himself to prize and govern him- 
self onely Love doth exalt the mind and neverthelesse at 

the same instant doth settle and compose it." The play of 
Romeo and Juliet was the story of the love of Bacon's youth 
and early manhood, and the score of years between the time 
of writing the play and publishing the essay had filled his life 
with other things, yet those who have read the cipher story 
know that an inner chamber of his heart enshrined a memory 
of Marguerite. 

I quote again from the address : "Still more noteworthy is 
the absence of any plausible excuse for Bacon's fond preserva- 
tion of his worthless rhymes and his neglect of the master- 
pieces that went by Shakespeare's name. He gave the most 
minute directions for the publication of his literary remains. 

216 



His secretary, Dr. Rawley, was entrusted with this responsi- 
bility and faithfully discharged it." 

Bacon's MSS. were given to two literary executors, not to 
Rawley alone, and a part was taken to Holland. Rawley con- 
tinued the publication of Bacon's works after 1626, publishing- 
all those that were left in his care. Without these, a large 
number of the interior works would have been incomplete and 
the work in the word-cipher interrupted. 

Sir Henry's assertion, "nothing could be easier than to 
make an equally impressive cipher which would show that Dar- 
win wrote Tennyson," etc., needs no refutation. Bacon does 
not say that it was exceedingly difficult to "make" the. biliteral 
cipher. 

Again we find : "It would be more to the purpose if the 
Baconians would tell us why on earth Bacon could not let the 
world know in his lifetime that he had written Shakespeare." 

The principal reason was because the history of his life 
was largely given in those plays, not alone in the biliteral, but 
in the word-cipher, and the revelation of that in the lifetime 
of Queen Elizabeth would have cost his own life. He hoped 
against hope to the very day of the queen's death, that she 
would relent and proclaim him heir to the throne. But he 
states that the witnesses were then dead, and the papers that 
would authenticate his claims destroyed. What could he do? 
Simply what he did. 

In the peroration we find : "I fear that the desire to drag 
down Shakespeare from his pedestal, and to treat the testimony 
of his personal friends as that of lying rogues is due to that 
antipathy to the actor's calling which has its eccentric mani- 
festations even to this day." 

This cannot in any way refer to my book, for the very 
nature of this work eliminates personal thoughts and wishes or 
preconceived ideas. It is as mechanical as the reading of hiero- 
glyphics, as naming perfectly well-known objects, as discrimin- 
ating the clicks of the telegraph. And as far as Bacon was 
concerned he desired only his right. 

It is by its great men in every age of the world that the 
actor's calling is dignified, but the genius of the man of the 
stage is not necessarily the genius of the man who wrote the 
greatest plays that time through all the centuries has produced. 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 

217 



THE BI-LITERAL CIPHER IN HENRY VII. 
Baconiana, London, July 1905. 

It lias been suggested to me that I should give some of the 
results of my examination of Mrs. Wells Gallup's work on 
Bacon's Henry VII. I was not in England when Mrs. Gallup's 
MSS. arrived from America, in the early part of 1904. On 
my return to London in June of that year, I heard that two 
or three members of our Society had been trying to work the 
cipher, but on comparing notes found that the various copies 
of the 1622 edition did not agree in some of the forms of Hic 
Italic letters. Only one member seemed inclined to devote the 
time and patience to investigate the matter at all thoroughly. 
That member, I understand, with much patience devoted one 
whole week to the study of the italic letters. His, very able re- 
port against the cipher made me wish to look into the matter 
still more thoroughly myself. This may appear presumptuor.-, 
as I was not one of the committee appointed to enquire into the 
subject. But I had had the advantage of many conversations 
with Mrs. Gallup, when she first presented her work to the 
public five years ago, and saw her and her sister, Miss Wells, 
at work on a book they found in my house not before decipher- 
ed by them. I was busy with other literary work during the 
summer of 1904, but in the autumn made up my mind to send 
my own copy of the 1622 edition of Henry VII. to the Howard 
Publishing Company, in America, for examination. I was anx- 
ious to know if it was a safe copy on which I might commence 
my work. It was returned to me by Mr. Moore in January, 
1905, with one or two pencilled corrections written by Mrs. 
Gallup in the margin. Mrs. Gallup, in her letter to me, said. 
"Your copy and ours are the same, except in, a very few places." 
In that letter, and in others since, she answered several of my 
questions, and they have materially helped me. I worked dili- 
gently for three months, often eight and ten hours a day. 

My studies have been confined to the first fifty pages only 
of the medium Italic type, I find in these fifty pages 10,058, 

218' 



Italic letters. Of these, 1,319 are capitals. For the present I 
shall confine my remarks to the capitals only. In these fifty 
pages only twenty-two letters of the alphabet are used. I have 
completed my studies on thirteen of these letters. They re- 
present 704 letters used for the two founts ; and with very few 
exceptions I find them correctly so used in Mrs. Gallup's MSS. 
sent to us for examination. I have not yet completed my studies 
on the remaining nine letters of the alphabet, representing 615 
letters. I am, however, finding the majority of these correctly 
used also. I am a slow worker, but each day's work is bringing 
out better results on these nine more difficult letters. I give 
below a table of all the letters in the order in which I found 
them easiest to read, with the columns of figures divided into 
"a's" and "b's. 





Totals. 


"a" 


"b" 


A. 


61 


25 


36 


E. 


78 


58 


20 


I. J. ... 


51 


49 


2 


M. 


49 


41 


8 


]sr. 


42 


32 


10 


u.v. . . 


11 


9 


2 


Q. 


13 


2 


11 


P. 


163 


119 


44 


E. 


41 


8 


33 


S. 


93 


62 


31 


w. 


19 


11 


8 


T. 


70 


39 


31 


Y. 


13 


7 


6 


K. 


71 


37 


34 


L. 


68 


46 


22 


F. 


78 


47 


31 


B. 


99 


65 


34 


D. 


74 


47 


27 


H. 


24 


12 


12 


0. 


24 


17 


7 


G. 


25 


18 


7 


C. 


152 


100 


52 



1,319 



851 



468 



219 



It was suggested to me, by a member who disliked the facts re- 
vealed in the cipher story, that even if I found the 1,319 capi- 
tals correctly used, that would not be sufficient to prove the 
existence of the cipher, unless I could also find that the small 
letters were correctly used by Mrs. Gallup. This made me leave 
the capitals for a time. I have since studied all the small let- 
ters of the medium italic type in those first fifty pages. But 
as they represent 8,739 letters, for the present I can only say 
I have finished my studies on three of the letters, namely, "k," 
"p," "w," and with only one or two exceptions I find them cor- 
rectly used. 

If my figures are correct, and I am prepared for the 
severest examination on these facts, can it be chance that those 
letters are correctly used in Mrs. Gallup's MSS. ? 

I would like to say here, that were it actually the case 
that only two forms of letters are used, the deciphering of over 
10,000 letters would have been a comparatively easy work. But 
in some of the letters there are many variations, and these again 
must be paired. And yet in all these pairings there is system 
and order, and a method in all the seeming madness. 

My work would have progressed much more rapidly had 
two or three others worked with me. For those who have the 
leisure and much patience I can recommend this interesting 
study. I am willing and in a position to give them many short 
cuts, and they, in their turn, could, I have no doubt, help to 
finish the work I have commenced, that is, simply to verify the 
working of Mrs. Gallup's MSS. on this Henry VII. Those 
Baconians who have never very seriously tried to work at the 
cipher, and are more concerned in refusing to accept the rather 
unpleasant historical facts revealed, I would ask to suspend 
their judgment, and to allow others, who may be honestly and 
seriously trying to arrive at the truth, still to be allowed to ex- 
amine the work submitted by Mrs. Gallup at the request of 
some of the members of our Society. The more I, as an 
amateur, study this technical part of our work, the more 
convinced I feel that Bacon did use his famous bi-literal cipher 
in his own prose history of Henry VII. A new discovery has 
been placed before us, and by experts ; why should we discredit 
their labours, and refuse to give an equal amount of time and 
patience in examining their work ? 

220 



I would like here to bring forward some curious facts 
connected with the printing of the 1622 edition of Henry VII. 
I have before me six copies — one belonging to Mrs. Pott, an- 
other to Mrs. Payne, and four of my own. Mrs. Payne's copy 
is similar to the copy collated for me by Mrs. Gallup. Mrs. 
Pott's copy has many differences in it — not in the words and 
matter, but in the use of the two founts of the Italic type. Two 
of my own copies are similar to Mrs. Pott's copy. My fourth 
copy, again, is quite different to all the others. Why should 
there be these differences in the various copies of the same edi- 
tion ? Why should type once set up have been altered ? And, 
when altered, why should these changes be carried through with 
system and order in other copies ? Before closing this paper, 
I would like to remind Baconians that Bacon, in writing to 
Tobie Mathew in 1609, uses these words: "I have sent you some 
copies of my book of the Advancement which you desired ; and 
a little work of my recreation which you desired not. My In- 
stauration I reserve for our conference ; it sleeps not. Those 
works of the alphabet are in my opinion of less use to you now 
than at Paris. . . . But in regard that some friends of yours 
have still insisted here, I send them to you, and for my part 
I value your own reading more than your publishing them to 
others" (Spedding, vol. iv., p. 134). Spedding, in criticising 
this letter, says, "What these 'Works of the Alphabet' may have 
been I cannot guess, unless they related to Bacon's cipher." 
Spedding then proceeds again to explain this cipher. 

Archbishop Tenison in 1679 was evidently aware that 
Bacon had used his Bi-literal Cipher in the 1623 folio of the 
"De Augmentis," for he especially recommends that "accurate" 
edition to those who wish to understand the Lord Bacon's 
Cipher (Baconiana, 1679, p. 28). I myself have very little 
doubt but that Tenison used the same cipher all through his 
Baconiana. I only wish I were an expert, and could decipheiv 
what he says. 

D. J. KlNDERSLET. 



221 



HENRY VII. 

A Reply to the Repoet of Me. Bompas. 
Baconiajsta, London^, Oct. 1905. 

I am grateful for the opportunity to reply to the article 
of the late Mr. Bompas in the July number of Baconian a. 

I am also grateful to Mr. Cunningham for his prefatory 
remarks and footnotes, and I wish to say that his regret is 
my own as well, that Mr. Bompas did not discuss the paper 
with members of the Society better advised than was he, and 
that the MS. of the article had not been submitted to me 
while Mr. Bompas was still with us, or at least before publi- 
cation, for some, if not all, the erroneous conclusions drawn 
could have been dissipated before they took form. The expla- 
nations would have given that gentleman and his readers a 
more comprehensive view, a different view point, and greater 
light upon the subject. 

It is rare that an article appearing in public print carries 
upon analysis its own evidences of error, and in the next 
preceding pages finds so complete a refutation as does this in 
the article of Mrs. Kindersley. 

In his opening statement Mr. Bompas says: "The copies 
of Henry VII. which have been examined do not exactly cor- 
respond. . . . The form of many of the capitals also differs 
in the different copies. . . . Mr. Cuningham's copy differs 
widely from the others. ... Either each copy contains a 
different cipher story, which is absurd, or the decipherer hap- 
pened by chance to light on the only correct copy, which is 
equally absurd." Then Mr. Bompas proceeds to build an 
argument upon the fact that the copy of my MS., furnished 
to the Society, did not correspond with some copy of 
Henry VII. with which he compared it, concluding, there- 
fore, that the cipher system must be a myth, and Mrs. Gallup 
a visionary or a fraud. 

222 



Any comparison to establish the correctness of my work 
must be made either with the copy I used or one identical with 
it. That Mr. Bompas used some copy not identical, but one 
printed differently, is substantiated by Mrs. Kindersley, 
whose thre^ months' work on an identical copy — as against 
one week Mr, Bompas spent on a different printing — resulted 
in her verification of nearly all the letters studied. It is still 
more forcibly proved by the table of headings Mr. Bompas 
j)rints, the Italics in which do not at all correspond in the 
different forms with the book I used. It therefore follows that 
the entire argument, from pages 169 to and including part 
of 1Y6, so far as relates to Henry VII., is founded upon a 
false premise and falls to the ground. 

Mr. Bompas says, "Either each copy contains a different 
cipher, which is absurd," &c. 

On the contrary, that is just what occurs in unlike copies. 
Those widely differing belong to different editions, although 
published in the same year, as I have found to be true, and 
stated in my article in Baconian a published in 1901. Two 
issues of the Treatise of Melancholy appeared in 1586 with 
differing Italic printing. I have deciphered both. One ends 
with an incomplete cipher word, which js completed in the 
other where the narrative is continued, and the book ends 
with the signature of Bacon on the last page. I have also 
found that in two editions of Bacon's acknowledged works one 
had the cipher and one had not. The peculiar Italicizing and 
the same forms of letters were in both. In one the arrange- 
ment of the letters followed the cipher system, in the other no 
amount of study could make them "read." Bacon refers in 
the cipher to some false and surreptitious copies issued with- 
out his authority. 

The differences in print of Henry VII. first came to 
light, apparently, through the comparisons made with my 
MS. in London, and the report of it was a great surprise to 
me. Mrs. Kindersley was kind enough to send me one of her 
copies, and, as before stated, this was found to be identical 
with the one I used except that three or four typographical 
errors in her copy were corrected in mine, and one in mine did 
not occur in hers, but in no case was a verbal change made and 
only one orthographical. 

223 



About the same time it chanced that a copy of the work 
— a recent importation from London — was sent me from 
Chicago for examination. This I found quite different in 
the use of Italics. I did not decipher the work, but became 
convinced that it either contained another cipher story, or 
was one of the ''false and surreptitious copies" before re- 
ferred to. 

In addition to the criticism of Henry VII., Mr. Bompas 
refers to some typographical errors making slight differences 
in our own editions of the Bi-literal Cipher, and to the exam- 
ples in the editions of De Augmentis of 1623 and 1624. 

I have to admit there are some printers' errors in my 
book that escaped the closest proof reading, much to my regret. 
The proof reading was extremely difficult because of the care 
required to keep the unusual spelling and occasional abbrevia- 
tions. Some errors were corrected in the third edition. Mr. 
Bompas found two or three — probably not all. I have had 
no opportunity to note the errata in a later publication. I 
can, however, make the broad assertion that in no single in- 
stance has any of these slight technical errors changed the 
meaning of a phrase, or made it obscure, or been of sufficient 
importance to affect in the least the overwhelming evidences 
of the existence of the system of the cipher and the correctness 
of its deciphering. 

Manifest errors occurred in the text of the old books, 
which were corrected in the deciphering, but they were so few 
and so evident as to prove rather than to disprove the system. 
They occur mostly in long groups, as in the example of the 
cipher in De Augmentis, occasionally a short group of four 
letters, once in a while a wrong font letter, but the meaning 
of the context was always sufficiently clear in itself to correct 
the error. I cannot better illustrate this than by quoting from 
my "Replies to Criticisms," issued in pamphlet form, but 
which has not appeared in public print. The explanation 
covers explicitly a number of points raised by Mr. Bompas, 
and being an analysis of Bacon's own illustration of the cipher 
in the 1624 Ve Augmentis, has the weight of the author's own 
methods of correction, and the suggestion, at least, that the 
errors were purposely made to educate the decipherer as to 



224 



what would be encountered in the books; also the manner of 
overcoming the difficulties as they should arise. 

"In the 1624 edition the second * in officio is changed 
by the law of tied letters ; the second u in nunquam has posi- 
tion or angle of inclination, to make it an ^a fount' letter; 
q in conquiesti is from the wrong fount, and the u has features 
of both founts but is clear in one distinctive difference — the 
width at the top; the q in quia is reversed by a mark; the a's 
in the first causa are formed like 'b fount' letters but are 
taller; the q of quos is from the wrong fount; the second a 
in aderas is reversed, being a tied letter; I in velint is from 
the wrong fount, also the p of yarati, the I of calumniam and 
the I of religions. 

"In line twelve 'pauci sunt' in 1623 ed. is ^parati sunt' 
in the 1624 ed. The correct grouping is ntqui velin tquip 
ratis untom nesad, the first a in 'parati' must be omitted to read 
diutius according to the Spartan dispatch. Otherwise the 
groups would be arati sunto mnesa. The m and n are both 
'h fount,' thus bringing two Vq at the beginning of this last 
group, indicating at once a mistake, for no letter in the bi4it- 
eral alphabet begins with two h's and wherever encountered 
may be known to indicate either a wrong fount letter or a 
wrong grouping. It is one of the guards against error. To 
continue the groups after the one last given several would be 
found to commence with hh, and the resulting letters would 
not 'read.' 

"Here, too, is an example of diphthongs, digraphs, and 
double letters, which are troublesome to 'A Correspondent.' 
The diphthong se of 'cseteris,' the digraph ct in perfectare, 
and the double ^'s and pp'^ are shown as separate letters and 
must be treated as such in deciphering Italics. 

"A very important feature, that most seem to forget, is 
that ciphers are made to hide things, not to make them plain 
or easy to decipher. They are constructed to be misleading, 
mysterious, and purposely made difficult except to those pos- 
sessing the key. Seekers after knowledge through them must 
not abandon the hunt upon encountering the first difficulty, 
improbability, inaccuracy, or stumbling block set for their 
confusion." 

225 



The article says : "The plain inference is that the Cipher 
and Cipher story are imaginary." 

Well, this is at least complimentary, but I doubt whether 
Mr. Bompas stopped to think what that statement would mean 
with all that it implies. I do not think he would, on reflec- 
tion, give me credit for a genius so broad, for it would be equal 
to the production of the plays themselves. 

Were I the possessor of an imagination so boundless, I 
would certainly not have spent it upon a production fore- 
doomed to be unpopular, or have subjected myself to the strain 
upon nerves and eyesight of six years' hard study of old books 
and their typographical peculiarities for a Baconian cloak to 
hide the brilliancy of that imagination. Yet if the material 
for the three hundred and ninety pages of my book were not 
found in Cipher in the old originals, then it must be the con- 
ception of my own brain. First, the plot of each story worked 
out; the account of Bacon's discovery of his parentage; the 
variations from historic records ; the death of Amy Robsart ; 
the tragedy of Essex, and that of Mary, Queen of Scots, and 
.other scraps of added history ; the love of Bacon for Margaret, 
and all the rest. All this thought out, in diction, much of it, 
of the highest order, in the old English spelling and phrase- 
ology of the 16th century and fitted with such nice exactness 
to the Italic letters of the old books, "separated into groups 
of five" — letters that even the sceptics admit the capitals at 
least agree with the alleged system — the study of months in 
the British Museum ; the explanations and demonstrations to 
-numberless people- — all to hide a genius so magnificent! In 
the language of Mr. Bompas, "Absurd!" And yet, I repeat, 
if not Cipher it must be my own production. 

It is useless to discuss the probability of Bacon's commit- 
ting State secrets to such a Cipher. It is not a time to ask 
the question, "Is it likely ?" The Cipher is there, and it only 
remains to master its intricacies and search out what it has 
to reveal. 

Elizabeth Wells Gallup. 



A WOED OR TWO ON CANONBURY TOWER. 

Baconiana, London. 

There are several suggestive points of connection to be 
noted between the old conventual buildings of Canonbury and 
our Francis St. Alban. There are also obscure particulars 
well worthy of inquiry. 

Originally the property of the Knights of St. John of 
Jerusalem, Canonbury House is generally supposed to have 
been built in 1362, ten years after Edward III. had exempted 
the Priory of St. Bartholomew from the payment of subsidies, 
in consequence of their great outlay in charity. Stow says 
that William Bolton (Prior from 1509 to 1532) rebuilt the 
house, and probably erected the fine square tower of brick. 
Nichol, in his "History of Canonbury," mentions that Bolton's 
rebus oi a bolt in a tun was still to be seen, cut in stone, in two 
places on the outside facing Wells' Row. The original house 
covered the whole s])ace now called Canonbury Place, and had 
a small park, with garden and offices. Prior Bolton either 
built or repaired the Priory and beautiful Church of St. Bar- 
tholomew, but at his death the connection between Canonbury 
and monasticism ceased.* 

The Tower House was now given by Henry VHI. to John 
Dudley, Earl of Northumberland, afterwards Viscount Lisle, 
father of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, whose history has 
lately risen into fresh and startling importance in consequence 
of certain deciphered history to be submitted to the world's 
judgment. John Dudley was executed as a traitor when Mary 
was proclaimed Queen in 1553. The Tower then again became 
Crown ]3roperty, and Queen Mary gave it to "Rich Spencer," 
the magnificent alderman of whom history speaks so fully, 
giving us even that which it denied us with regard to Francis 
St. Alban — details of his funeral obsequies. It is from this 
Sir John Spencer (father-in-law of Lord Compton) that Sir 
Francis "Bacon," when Attorney-General (1616), leased 
Canonbury Manor. t 

*See "Old and New London," Vol. II., p. 269. 

tSir John Spencer's daughter and heiress Elizabeth, married Lord 
William Compton (created Earl of Northampton), eloping with him from 
Canonbury Manor in a baker's basket. (As I am a man. there was one con- 
veyed out of my house yesterday in this basket. — Merry Wives of W. Act 

IV., sc. ii.) 

227 



The internal arrangements and decorations of Canonbury 
House are commented on in detail by Lewis, who describes 
the elaborate ornamental carving, emblematic figures and 
devices, ships, flowers, foliage, and other objects which Bacon- 
ians have learnt to associate with the symbolic method 
of teaching of the Renaissance, and pre-eminently of the 
"Great Master" himself, but which in the regulation literature 
of our day are described as "specimens of taste for ornamental 
carving and stucco work that prevailed about the time of 
Elizabeth." There are also medallions of three great men 
who seem to have been in a way models to our Francis — types 
of the nobler Pioneer, the mighty Conqueror, the Master 
Builder, Alexander the Great, namely Julius Caesar, Titus 
Vespasian. Then with the arms of the Dudleys may be seen 
the arms of Queen Elizabeth in several places, and her initials, 
"E. R." with the date — 1599, at which time the premises were 
fitted up by Sir John Spencer. 

"On the white wall of the staircase, near the top of the 
Tower, are some Latin hexameter verses comprising the ab- 
breviated names of the Kings of England from William the 
Conquerer to Charles L, painted in Roman character an inch 
in length, but almost obliterated. The lines were most prob- 
ably the effusion of some poetical inhabitant of an upper apart- 
ment in the building during the time of the monarch last named,, 
such persons having frequently been residents of the place." 

Thomas Tomlins, in his "History of Islington," writes 
thus : 

"The Earl and Countess, by description Lord and Lady 
Compton, by indenture 15th February, Jac. 161 6, let to the 
Right Hon. Francis Lord Verulam, Visct. St. Albans, by the 
name of Sir Francis Bacon Knight,* His Majs. Attorney Gen- 
eral, all that mansion and garden belonging to what is called 
Canonbury House, in the Parish of Islington * * * for 
40 years from Lady-day, 1617." 

With regard to the Tower, the same writer states : 

"The great Sir Francis Bacon resided here from February, 
1616; as also at the time of his receiving the Great Seal, on 7th 
Jan., 161 8, and for some time afterwards. f 

"After the decease of Henry Prince of Wales (in 161 2) the 
Manor of Newington Barrowe was, with other portion of land, 
on loth January, 14 Jac, granted upon lease for 99 years to 

^Created Baron Verulam of Verulam 12th of July, 1618, and Visct. St. 
Alban Feb. 3rd, 1619. 

fThe acreage of various "closes" is here given. 

228 



Sir Francis Bacon, Knt., at that time the King's Attorney Gen- 
eral, and also Chancellor to Charles Prince of Wales, after- 
wards Charles I., and others, his law officers and ministers in 
trust for him, which lease, upon his accession, became merged 
in the Crown." — Dated at Canonbury, 15th Sept., 1629. 

In connection Avith recent statements concerning the par- 
entage of Francis St. Alban, it will be observed that in Nelson's 
"History of Islington" the writer states that Queen Elizabeth 
was at Canonbury Tower in the year 1561, and that she had a 
"lodge" or summer-house looking into Canonbury Fields. It 
bore her arms and initials, with the date 1595. "The Tower 
was encompassed by pleasant fields and gardens, and a salubri- 
ous air." 



229 



XI 8 



I - Mr '33 






^< 






<^'<. 









K*'^(v»' 






•^^ 



-> 

<'^' 

''^/.. 








.■^• 









■■^j; 



. vj 



^,N 



■* Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 

lagnesium Oxide 



/ X^^sJ ^^;^M\^ ^"^^Z ..y^' 

/a <-? «} * Jf^f^^^ •» '^■4> « Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process, r 

'ww ''o i. ^^JM'^^y^r/ < "V*0 Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

■ -v ! rt ♦ ^- "^ Jo Treatment Date: Feb. 2009 \ 

.■'^i^'^ "> % '-„'>.-' -^^ CJ5 %r',- P*'eservationTechnologies ' 

* • » 1 * aS* ^ «> <• ^ ^ ' A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIDNS PRESERVATION . 

C\- .0 ***-*'- -^ V "I't?* **X> 111 Thomson Park Dme , 

»#>. A*' ''Jt-^'' ■> .'^ »*^^'%'^A,'o "'i*' Z''. Cranberry Township, PA 16066 |S 



•^0'- 







^o\ 









^"-^^^ 












< « 









<j5°^ 



O N • 






^^^^. 






WtRT 
BOOKBINDING 

C'dAKille. Pa 









